CT 


UC-NRLF 


B    3    SDfl    Efifl 


1 


PRESS    OF    THE 

AMERICAN    PUBLISHING    COMPANY, 

30    UNION    SQUARE, 

NEW    YORK. 


SCjie  Conspiracy 

it)  th:e 

^.  S.  Jlai?g  ©epattment 
f  ranfelm  ^.  Smitfj 


''  'S^^^s^  proceedings  all  concern  ffie  administration 
of  justice;  "^Ricfi  is  ifie  fast  resort  of  outraged  Ci6erty, 
and  tHe  main  defense  of  individuaC  rig  fits.'' 

HARPER'S    WEEKLY,   APRtL  5,  1890. 


1890, 


^T^HE  uiidersis:iied  ^-ould  solicit  of 
all  iwlio  read  tlie  accompanying: 
liistory,  that  they  ^'ill  not  omit  the 
business  details  in  the  first  chapters 
of  the  document. 

These  reveal  clearly  the  inciting: 
cause  of  the  assault  hy  officials  in 
the  Xavy  Department ;  and  show  proof 
that  it  v%'as  their  reven8:e  for  his  fear- 
less exposure  of  fraud  in  that  Depar- 
ment,  upon  a  special  demand  of  the 
Senate  of  the  United  States. 

Franklin  ^W.  Smith. 


L  he    Conspiracy 

in   the 

U.  S.  Navy  Department 

against 

F^rankilin  W.  ^mitti 

Of    Boston— 1861-1865. 


A  Record  of  Flagrant  Abuse  of  the  War  Power 
in   the  late   Civil   War. 


"  Is  there  no  Danger  that  it  (the  war  power),  may  be  Used  to  Sub- 
"  serve  the  Purposes  of  Malice  and  Revenge  ?  Let  the  Case  of  Smith 
"Brothers  Give  a  Most  Emphatic  Answer." 

Valedictory  lecture  to  Harvard  Law  School,  January, 
i86y,  by  Ho7i.  Joel  Parker,  Royall  Professor  of  Law  iii 
Harvard  and  Dartmouth   Colleges. 


"  The  First  and  Principal  Misprison  is  the  Mal-Administration  of 
High  Officers,  who  are  in  Public  Trust  and  Employment." 

"  A  Conspiracy  to  Indict  an  Innocent  Man  Falsely  and  Maliciously, 
who  is  Accordingly  Indicted  and  Acquitted,  is  a  Further  Abuse  of  Public 
Justice,  for  which  the  Conspirators  were  by  the  Ancient  Law  to  Receive 
what  is  Called  the  '  Villenous  '  Judgment,  viz.,  to  be  Discredited  as  Jurors 
and  Witnesses ;  to  Forfeit  their  Goods  and  Chattels  and  Lands,  for  Life  ; 
and  to  have  their  Bodies  Committed  to  Prison." 

— Blackstone' s  Commentaries. 

ivi255GG6 


Extracts  from  an  Editorial  in  the  ''  New  York  Journal  of 
Commerce,"  January  20th,  1866. 

"Mr.  Franklin  W.  Smith  is  a  well-known  merchant  of 
the  city  of  Boston.  Boston  is  the  principal  city  of  Massa- 
chusetts. Massachusetts  is  the  principal  State  of  New- 
England.  New  England  governs  the  United  States  for  the 
present.  The  United  States  compose  a  country  distin- 
guished as  the  patron  of  justice,  and  the  paradise  of  free 
principles.     This  is  the  19th  century. 

' '  All  these  facts  must  be  carefully  borne  in  mind,  lest 
any  one  should  imagine  that  it  is  a  romance  which  forms 
the  subject  of  this  article. 

' '  We  have  before  us  a  pamphlet  of  sixty-one  pages, 
being  the  report  of  a  special  committee  of  the  Boston  Board 
of  Trade,  which  vouches  for  the  truth  of  the  story  it  con- 
tains. The  statements  in  the  pamphlet  are  signed  by  the 
following  names  :  W.  B.  Spooner,  Charles  G.  Nazro, 
Charles  O.  Whitmore,  Otis  Norcross,  James  C.  Converse, 
Joseph  M.  Wightman,  Lorenzo  Sabine.  These  will  be 
recognized  by  many  as  the  names  of  highly  respectable 
merchants  in  the  said  city  of  Boston,  State  of  Massachu- 
setts aforesaid.     They  are  men  of  truth  and  veracity." 

*  -x-  -x-  *  * 

"Mr.  Sumner  and  the  Board  of  Trade  make  it  clear 
enough  that  Mr.  Smith  was  the  victim  of  persecution  on  the 

part  of  the  government  officials. ' ' 

*  -;f  *  -;;-  * 

"  Let  us  find  a  lesson  in  all  this.  The  Boston  Board  of 
Trade  has  done  well  to  print  such  a  pamphlet." 

*  ■  «  *  -X-  -H- 

"  Reparation  can  never  be  made  for  these  wrongs.  The 
national  debt  doubled  would  not  suffice  to  make  due  return. 
Money  can  never  do  it." 


LETTER  FROM  HON.  H.  L.  DAWES 

U.  S.  SENATOR   FROM    MASSACHUSETTS, 

TO  

krank:IvIN    w.   sniixh. 


PiTTSFiELD,  Mass.,  August  20,  1889. 

My  Dear  Sir:  I  am  in  receipt  of  your  communication 
in  reference  to  the  court-martial  proceedings  instituted 
against  you  during  the  war.  I  am  reminded  by  it  of  a 
long  delayed  duty.  Of  those  to  whom  your  long  and 
honorable  career  as  a  business  man  is  known  ;  who  were 
familiar  at  the  time  with  that  transaction,  and  had  occasion 
and  opportunity  to  know  its  animus,  few  are  now  living. 
I  was  in  Congress  at  the  time,  and  with  my  then  colleagues, 
was  called  upon  to  make  myself  familiar  with  all  its  details, 
and  with  the  result  most  honorable  to  you.  I  have  won- 
dered that  you  have  not  published  to  the  world  the  entire 
record,  with  Mr.  Lincoln's  endorsement  upon  it,  in  his  own 
hand-writing,  of  his  estimate  of  your  integrity  and  his 
trenchant  words  dismissing  the  case. 

I  write  this  because,  those  who  instituted  the  proceed- 
ing, and  the  great  President  who  condemned  it,  .and 
those  of  my  colleagues,  who  with  me  specially  ex- 
amined it,  are  all  dead.  I  think  I  ought  to  leave  on 
record  the  opinion  which  I  then  formed,  after  an  ex- 
haustive examination,  and  in  which  I  know  the  entire 
Massachusetts  delegation  in  Congress  at  the  time  shared, 
of  the  outrageous   and  unjust  character  of  the  whole  pro- 

3 


ceeding.  This  examination  was  made  by  Mr.  Sumner 
and  the  late  Hon.  B.  F.  Thomas  and  myself  for  the  dele- 
gation. 

It  is  true  that  in  the  exciting  times  of  the  war,  when 
large  transactions  were  often  from  necessity  carried  on  in  a 
hurried  and  careless  manner,  and  when  bad  passions  were 
rife  and  ugly  purposes  were  engendered,  a  prosecution  by 
court-martial  was  instituted  against  you  ;  at  the  time  a 
large  contractor  for  supplies  for  the  navy.  Courts-martial 
were  then  so  frequent  and  resorted  to  so  often  for  sinister 
ends  that  it  came  to  be  a  saying  that  "  courts-martial  are 
organized  to  convict."  This  one  conducted  the  trial  in  a 
manner  and  with  a  relentless  pursuit  which,  looked  at  from 
the  standpoint  of  these  calm  times,  would  be  pronounced 
brutal  by  all  fair-minded  men. 

It  not  only  seized  the  accused  by  military  force  but 
entered  his  private  dwelling  and  carried  off  all  his  private 
as  well  as  business  papers,  even  breaking  locks  and  pos- 
sessing itself  of  the  letters  that  had  passed  between  him 
and  his  wife.  It  examined,  as  with  a  microscope,  every 
item  of  a  business  with  the  government,  covering  several 
years  and  twelve  hundred  thousand  dollars,  searching  for 
fraud  as  a  hunter  pursues  his  game,  and  after  months  of 
such  a  trial  of  such  varied  and  complicated  transactions, 
they  could  only  find,  and  that  on  technical  grounds,  that 
the  government  had  been  defrauded  in  the  sum  of  one 
hundred  dollars.  When  this  record  came  up  to  Mr. 
Lincoln  for  approval,  he  set  it  all  aside  in  words  endorsed 
on  its  back,  which  carry  with  them  the  highest  testimonials 
to  your  integrity.  The  result  made  it  clear  to  every 
judicial  mind  which  examined  it,  that  the  prosecution  was 
instigated  and  pressed,  because  your  straightforward  ways 
interfered  with  questionable  methods  of  transacting  busi- 
ness, and  their  success  rendered  your  removal  necessary. 
I  have  good  reason  to  know  that  Secretary  Welles  himself 
became  convinced  of  this,  and  deeply  regretted  that  he  had 
unwittingly  been  made  the  instrument  of  such  injustice. 

I  am  glad  of  the  opportunity  to  furnish  you  with  this 
statement,  and  remain  as  ever,         Truly  yours, 

H.  L.  Dawes. 


It  is  with  pleasure  that  I  respond  to  the  suggestion  of 
Senator  Dawes,  by  this  publication  of  a  personal  experi- 
ence during  the  War  of  the  Rebellion — the  full  history 
of  which  was  prepared  more  than  twenty  years  ago  to 
be  issued  in  the  event  of  my  decease.  Inasmuch  as  I 
have  been  mercifully  spared  to  see  the  maturity  of  a  new 
generation  (while  almost  all  of  those  who  sought  my 
destruction  have  been  called  to  their  final  account),  this 
recital  becomes  a  duty,  since  few  now  living  are  cogni- 
zant of  that  case.  It  is  therefore  revived,  in  order  that 
partial  or  erroneous  statements  relating  thereto  may  be 
avoided ;  as  well  as  the  grave  responsibility  attending 
the  utterance  of  such  statements.* 

In  abnegation  of  personal  feeling  toward  my  perse- 
cutors ;  burying  bitter  memories  of  them  in  their  graves, 
1  suppress  their  names,  and  tell  the  story  from  official 
and  public  documents.  These  are  indisputable,  impar- 
tial and  final. 

The  report  of  the  Boston  Board  of  Trade  in  review  of 
the  case,  and  the  paper  of  Senator  Sumner  to  President 
Lincoln,  quote  a  threatening  letter  from  the  chief  of  a 
Naval  Bureau.  It  is  known  as  "  the-dead-cock-in-the- 
pit"  letter.     Vide  p.  51  and  Addenda  III. 

The  writer  of  the  Report  submitted  to  me  whether 
the  name  of  the  author  of  the  letter  might  be  suppressed. 
I  assented  to  the  erasure — but  with  keen  remembrance 
that  he  had  aimed  a  deadly  assault  upon  my  own. 

The  following  statement  is  a  slight  compensation  for 

*  I  am  advised  by  eminent  counsel  that  any  distorted  or  injuri- 
ous mention  of  this  history  exposes  the  author  to  severe  legal 
retribution, 


the  injustice  recited;  for,  while  many  may  be  conscious 
of  integrity,  there  is  no  instance  of  its  vindication  against 
the  war  power  and  treasury  of  the  National  Govern- 
ment, wielded  with  like  desperation  and  malignity. 
Personal  satisfaction  at  the  defeat  of  this  onslaught  is  of 
slight  importance  compared  to  its  public  relations : 

First.  Toward  protection  of  witnesses  summoned  by  Congress 
against  the  revenge  of  officials  implicated  by  their  testimony. 

Second.  As  a  warning  against  the  surrender  of  civilians  to 
military  power. 

The  seriousness  of  the  above  considerations  was 
recognized  in  consequent  repeal  by  Congress  of  the  law 
which  permitted  the  outrage ;  and  it  has  given  to  the 
case  of  the  U.  S.  Navy  Department  vs.  Franklin  W. 
Smith  the  historical  status  of  a  cause  celebre. 

The  Act  of  Congress  of  July  17,  1862,  provides  that 
"  any  person  who  shall  contract  to  furnish  supplies  of 
any  kind  or  description  for  the  army  or  the  navy,  he 
shall  be  deemed  and  taken  as  a  part  of  the  land  or  naval 
forces  of  the  United  States,  for  which  he  shall  contract 
to  furnish  said  supplies,  and  be  subject  to  the  rules  and 
regulations  for  the  government  of  the  land  and  naval 
forces  of  the  United  States." 

The  Report  of  the  Boston  Board  of  Trade  upon  the 
case  of  Franklin  W.  Smith  comments  upon  this  legisla- 
tion as  follows : 


"The  committee  quote  the  act  of  Congress  and  say,  that 
upon  the  construction  which  has  been  given  to  it  they  do 
not  see  why  every  person  who  contracts  to  furnish  a  lump 


of  chalk,  for  the  use  of  the  army  or  navy,  is  not  Hable — on 
offence  to  some  official  personage — to  a  trial  by    court- 
martial,  t-  ^  >i< 
This  is  unconditionally  monstrous.       No  trial  by  jury  !' ' 


*'*I  will  maintain  as  long  as  I  live,'  said  Dupin,  the 
great  French  advocate,  '  that  the  condemnation  of  Marshal 
Ney  was  not  just,  for  his  defence  was  not  free.'  Can  there 
ever  be  a  /-ree  defence  for  a  civilian  arraigned  under  the  act 
of  July  17,  1862? 

*'  We  have  read  that  Niceron,  a  merchant,  and  the  agent 
of  commercial  companies  in  Paris,  was  committed  to  the 
Bastile  simply  for  remonstrating  against  a  projected 
monopoly  in  the  article  of  whale  oil  ;  so,  too,  we  have  read 
that  the  Star  Chamber  imposed  a  fine  of  ;^2,ooo,  sterling 
money  of  the  realm,  on  Chambers,  a  merchant  of  London, 
for  refusing  to  pay  poundage  and  tonnage,  and  for  saying 
that  '  merchants  were  more  screwed  up  and  wronged  in 
England  than  in  Turkey.' 

"  The  sixteenth  section  of  the  act  of  Congress  of  July  17, 
1862,  as  relates  to  a  class  of  citizens  in  civil  life,  revives  the 
Bastile  and  the  Star  Chamber.  Nay,  more  ;  overleaping 
eighteen  centuries  of  Christian  civiHzation  at  a  single 
bound,  goes  back  to  heathen  Rome  and  revives  maxims  of 
Caesar,  that  *  arms  and  laws  do  not  flourish  .together  ; ' 
that  '  war  will  not  bear  much  liberty  of  speech. ' 

**  We  measure  our  words  ;  for,  aside  from  our  own  repu- 
tation, this  Report,  if  accepted,  will  become  the  judgment 
of  this  Board,  and  a  part  of  the  commercial  history  of 
Boston.  We  measure  our  words.  Seldom  in  legislation 
has  there  been  a  more  terrible,  a  more  appalling  mistake, 
and  the  very  member  of  Congress  who  reported  it  in  bill 
to  the  House,  magnanimously  owns  it  now,  and,  on  the 
second  day  of  March,  1865,  stood  up  in  his  place  and  con- 
fessed his  error." 

In  the  U.  S.  Senate,  February,  1865,  in  debate  upon 
the  prosecution  of  Smith  Brothers,  under  the  above  law, 


8 


Hon.  John  P.  Hale,  Senator  from  New  Hampshire,  spoke 
as  follows  : 

"  Sir,  it  is  impossible  for  me  to  scan  the  motives  of  men  ; 
it  is  enough  for  me  to  deal  with  my  own  ;  but,  standing 
here  under  all  the  responsibilities  which  attach  to  me — 
fond  as  any  man  of  what  little  reputation  belongs  to  me — 
careful  of  my  word,  I  think,  as  most  men — I  aver  before 
the  Senate,  before  the  country  and  before  God,  that  I  have 
not  a  shadow  of  doubt  that  the  sole  oifense  for  which  Mr. 
Smith  was  arrested  was  the  evidence  that  he  gave  upon  the 
occasion." 

In  a  subsequent  debate,  March,  1865,  Hon.  H.  L. 
Dawes,  of  Massachusetts,  upon  the  same  subject,  said  : 

*'  I  do  not  say  why  this  unjustifiable  course  was  pursued 
toward  these  men.  I  only  say  that  it  happened  immedi- 
ately after  they  had  testified  before  an  investigating  com- 
mittee of  Congress,  in  reference  to  certain  frauds  that  had 
come  to  their  knowledge,  very  near  the  doors  of  certaiti 
naval  officials.  Now,  sir,  I  submit  that  it  is  time  for  us  to 
act." 

Mr.  Davis,  of  Maryland,  moved  as  follows : 

"  That  no  person  shall  be  tried  by  court-martial,  or  mili- 
tary commission,  in  any  State  or  Territory  where  the 
courts  of  the  United  States  are  open,  except  persons  actu- 
ally mustered  in  the  military  or  naval  service  of  the  United 
States,  or  rebel  enemies  charged  with  being  spies  ;  and  all 
proceedings  heretofore  had  contrary  to  this  provision  are 
declared  vacated." 

Mr.  Dawes,  of  Massachusetts  : 

' '  Mr.  Chairman,  I  believe  that,  during  the  time  I  have 
served  in  Congress,  I  have,  to  the  extent  of  my  ability,  de- 


voted  myself  to  the  effort  to  ferret  out  and  punish  those 
who  have  been  engaged  in  defrauding  the  Government." 

**In  carrying  out  what  I  was  endeavoring  to  do,  I,  in 
co-operation  with  others,  reported  to  the  House  a  bill  which 
became  a  law,  making  contractors  with  the  Government 
subject  to  trial  by  court-martial.  I  was  aware  that  it  was 
an  extreme  measure.  In  putting  into  the  hands  of  the 
officers  of  the  Government  this  extreme  power,  I  had  confi- 
dence that  they  would  exercise  it  with  moderation  and 
reason.  But,  Mr.  Chairman,  I  am  sorry  to  say,  that  my 
observation  of  the  administration  of  that  law,  of  which  I 
take  to  myself  some  part  of  the  responsibility,  has  been 
such  during  the  past  year  or  two  as  to  compel  me  to  sup- 
port this  amendment.  Sir,  we  seem  to  have  lost  sight,  in 
the  execution  of  that  law,  of  the  guarantees  of  the  Consti- 
tution. 

* '  It  is  because  I  had  a  little  something  to  do  with  fur- 
nishing the  Department  with  this  artillery  which  they  have 
turned  so  much  upon  the  people  of  the  Northern  States, 
and  so  administered  as  to  become  the  potent  instrument  for 
trampHng  upon  the  rights  of  the  citizens,  that  I  have  ven- 
tured to  raise  a  protest  against  the  very  Bill  I  reported 
myself,  that  has  been  perverted  from  the  honest  use  for 
which  it  was  enacted  by  the  last  Congress  of  the  United 
States,  and  to  ask  the  House  to  do  this  much  and  this  little 
for  the  protection  of  our  citizens." 

Hon.  Charles  Sumner  wrote  to  President  Lincoln  con- 
cerning the  violence  of  Navy  officials  toward  Smith 
Brothers,  as  follows : 

"I  am  not  astonished  that  these  proceedings  were  used 
in  the  House  of  Representatives  as  an  argument  for  the 
total  repeal  of  the  act  of  Congress  authorizing  the  trial  of 
civilians  by  courts-martial.  Such  a  case  as  this  must  make 
us  fear,  that  under  this  act,  justice  may  be  sacrificed.  It 
must  make  honest  merchants  hesitate  to  enter  into  business 
relations  with  the  Government." 


10 


Hon.  Joel  Parker,  Law  Professor  of  Harvard  College, 
at  his  retirement  in  1 866  for  age,  delivered  a  valedictory 
course  of  lectures  upon  the  Executive,  Legislative  and 
Judicial  Functions  of  the  U.  S.  Constitution,  which  were 
published. 

In  the  first  he  cited  three  instances  of  atrocious  abuse 
of  the  war  power  during  the  Rebellion,  giving  the  case 
of  Smith  Brothers  pre-eminence.  He  declares  that 
these  gentlemen  were  prosecuted  **  because  they  refused  to 
participate  in  frauds  upon  the  Government!' 

Horace  Greeley  wrote  in  the  N.  Y.  Tribune  : 

"The  celebrated  case  of  Franklin  W.  Smith  and  brother 
was  one  of  those  which  largely  helped  to  bring  military 
tribunals  into  public  contempt." 

After  the  vindication  of  Smith  Brothers  by  President 
Lincoln,  the  tyrannical  law  was  repealed.  Thence  after- 
ward the  zeal  of  chiefs  of  bureaus  subsided,  and  parties 
against  whom  allegations  had  been  made  by  a  com- 
mittee of  the  U.  S.  Senate  upon  their  testimony  were 
undisturbed  by  civil  process. 

War  ii  merciless.  Its  miseries  do  not  culminate  in 
the  aggregate  slaughter  of  armies.  Its  demoralization 
awakens  avarice,  deadens  sympathy,  hardens  conscience 
and  lowers  the  standard  of  public  morality.  In  the  din 
of  its  conflict  and  the  intensity  of  its  anxieties,  conspiracy 
steals  forth  ruthlessly ;  its  steps  unheard  and  its  plots 
unnoticed.  Thence  follow  crimes  unseen  and  cruelties 
unknown 


11 


Power  delegated  for  National  deliverance  reaches  bad 
hands  and  is  turned  to  tyranny.  If,  herein,  atrocities 
have  been  recorded,  to  stimulate  future  jealousy  of  mili- 
tary absolutism  and  watchfulness  of  its  administration, 
this  experience  of  its  abuse  will  not  have  been  in  vain. 
Individual  persecution  will  have  contributed  to  future 
public  protection. 

F.  W.  S. 


12 


* '  This  is  indeed  a  strange  history  to  be  enacted  in  this 
loyal  commonwealth,  where  the  courts  of  justice  are  in 
peaceful  operation  and  the  laws  obeyed  with  cheerful  alac- 
rity ;  but  it  is  one  only  of  the  many  illustrations,  with 
which  history  is  full,  with  what  facility  in  times  of  great 
civil  convulsions,  the  highest  functions  of  government  are 
used  by  subordinate  agents  to  accomplish  personal  ends 
under  the  guise  of  public  justice." — Hon.  B.  F.  Thomas, 
{late  Judge  of  the  Supreme  Court  of  Massachusetts,  and 
member  of  Congress  from  Boston),  upon  the  case  of  Frank- 
lin W.  Smith. 


EXTRACTS    FROM    PUBLIC    RECORDS 

OF   A  

CAUSE     CEIvEBRK. 

THE  U.  S.  NAVY  DEPARTMENT  ks.  FRANKLIN  W.  SMITH. 


PART    KIRSX. 

Reform  of  the  Old  Contract  System   Through  the  Effort 
of  F.   W.  Smith. 

Upon  the  election  of  Abraham  Lincoln  to  the  Presi- 
dency of  the  United  States,  the  hardware  house  of  Smith 
Brothers  &  Co.  made  their  first  tenders  for  supplies  to 
the  Navy  Department. 

On  the  24th  of  February,  1862,  and  before  the  fulfil- 
ment of  their  first  contract,  Mr.  Franklin  W.  Smith 
addressed  a  printed  paper  to  the  Chief  of  the  Bureau  of 
Yards  and  Docks,  in  argument  that  the  contract  system 
as  then  existed,  opened  facilities  for  gross  wrong  upon 
the  government.  This  paper,  with  others  hereinafter 
mentioned,  may  be  found  in  the  Report  of  the  Select 
Committee  on  Naval  Supplies  of  the  United  States  Sen- 
ate of  July  4,  1864. 

The  following  extracts  will  indicate  its  tenor  : 

**  Having  decided  to  attempt  some  government  contracts 
we  analyzed  the  published  reports  of  the  department  iti 
previous  years  to  discover  the  modus  operandi.  We  were 
astonished  that  a  system  that  left  such  records  of  bargain- 
ing could  have  been  so  long  maintained. 

13 


J4 


"  We  (Smith  Brothers),  shall  be  glad  to  aid  in  any  effort 
to  replace  the  system  by  one  far  more  agreeable  to  those 
who  would  be  honorable  competitors  for  government 
business. ' ' 


On  the  loth  of  February,  1863,  he  addressed  a 
printed  paper  to  the  Secretary  of  the  Navy  and  Mr. 
Sedgwick,  chairman  of  the  Committee  on  Naval  Affairs, 
proposing  a  remedy  for  the  discreditable  system  hitherto 
existing  by  law ;  extracts  from  which  are  as  follows  : 

PAPER  TO   THE   SECRETARY    OF  THE    NAVY 
AND    HON.  CHARLES    B.    SEDGWICK. 

Washington,  February  10,  1863. 

The  bill  before  the  House  proposes  to  remedy  evils  in 
the  contract  system  of  the  Navy  Department  that  have 
existed  for  many  years.  The  disadvantages  that  have  fol- 
lowed to  the  government  have  been  inherent  in  the  system 
itself.  In  two  bureaus  of  the  department  a  system  of  pro- 
posals by  advertisement  has  been  maintained,  that  in  result 
was  a  mere  matter  of  chance  to  the  respective  parties. 
Thus  in  the  Bureau  of  Yards  and  Docks  it  has  been  custo- 
mary to  advertise  for  a  great  variety  of  articles  which  were 
only  to  be  called  for  if  wa7ited.  The  chance,  therefore,  for 
the  bidder  to  calculate  upon  is  :  What  articles  will  be 
ivanted  ? 

'K  '1^  »p  'f'  '1^ 

If  the  contracts  of  the  department,  as  published  for  years 
past,  be  analyzed,  it  will  be  found  that  a  system  of  bidding 
has  been  maintained  by  which  the  merchandise  advertised 
has  been  offered  to  the  government  at  very  much  less  than 
its  value  in  the  market ;  the  bidders  having  calculated  ac- 
cording to  their  estimate  of  the  real  wants  of  government. 
The  law  has  required  that  the  lowest  bid,  in  aggregate 
upon  the  whole,  should  be  accepted. 


15 


The  merchant,  therefore,  who  would  approach  the  gov- 
ernment with  his  offer,  must  follow  these  old  precedents  or 
be  entirely  distanced  by  his  competitors. 

Honorable  mercantile  houses  have  desired  and  urged  a 
reform  in  the  system  that  would  place  the  transactions  of 
the  department  upon  a  mere  legitimate  basis  to  all  parties 
concerned. 


THE    REMEDY. 

The  bill  reported  by  the  committee  is  an  advance 
towards  remedying  the  evils  of  the  system.  In  two  of  its 
provisions,  however,  in  my  judgment,  it  is  defective  : 

First.  By  providing  that  there  may  be  an  increase  of 
fifty  per  ceyitimi  or  a  decrease  of  twenty  five  per  centum 
upon  the  quantities  advertised  ;  the  game  of  chance  is  still 
open. 

Let  the  Navy  Department,  as  the  War  Department, 
advertise  for  precisely  ivhat  is  to  be  received ;  ?io  inore,  no 
less.  There  can  then  be  no  ''nominal  prices."  They  will 
disappear  ;  for  the  merchant  will  know  that  the  merchan- 
dise described  is  to  be  furnished.  If  the  War  Department 
wants  100  ambulances  and  200  wagons,  they  contract  for 
and  demand  like  quantities  as  advertised.  There  is  no 
chance  to  estimate  that  there  may  be  dehvered,  under  the 
contract,  50  ambulances  and  500  wagons.  The  War 
Department,  therefore,  receives  no  bids  at  "nominal 
prices." 

If  the  Navy  Department  is  uncertain  as  to  its  want  of 
some  articles,  let  them  be  bought  when  the  demand  shall 
arise.  It  can  buy  in  open  market,  or  it  can  direct  its  agents 
to  advertise,  at  any  time,  for  one  day,  or  one  month,  for 
any  additional  articles  that  may  be  demanded. 

If  the  schedules,  as  contracted  for,  are  being  rapidly  ex- 
hausted, the  department  can,  before  the  contracts  expire, 
advertise  for  more  merchandise,  by  the  provision  of  the  bill 
of  the  committee. 

Second.  Having  thus  effectually  removed  all  occasion  or 
opportunity  for  nominal   prices,    the   clause    allowing    the 


16 


rejection  of  bids  for  nominal  prices  can  be  omitted.  It 
gives  an  opportunity  for  unfairness  by  an  arbitrary  decision, 
as  to  what  is  a  nominal  price.  One  merchant,  perhaps,  by 
unusual  facilities  possessed,  may  afford  to  supply  articles 
less  than  any  other  parties.  The  government  would  suffer, 
and  the  merchant  be  wronged,  if  the  bid  were  to  be  rejected 
because  the  price,  appeared  too  cheap. 

The  amendments  to  the  resolution  suggested  by  the 
above  are  : 

First.  The  omission  of  the  clause  allowing  variations 
from  the  quantities  advertised. 

Second.  The  omission  of  the  clause  allowing  the  rejec- 
tion of  bids  for  nominal  prices  :  because,  if  the  quantities 
are  fixed  as  above  mentioned,  there  can  be  no  nominal 
prices. 

Respectfully  submitted. 

Franklin  W.  Smith. 

Hon.  Chas.  B.  Sedgwick, 

Chairman  Committee  on  Naval  Affairs. 


Letter  to  HON.  D.   W.  GOOCH,  M.  C,  from  Massachusetts. 
Printed  in  U.  S.  Senate  Report. 

New  York,  February  12,  1863. 

My  Dear  Sir  :  I  am  glad  to  notice  by  the  papers  that 
the  resolution  concerning  contracts  was  recommitted  after 
debate,  as  I  feared  my  suggestions  were  too  late. 

We  have  really  no  pecuniary  interest  in  the  amendments 
suggested  ;  for  it  is  impossible  to  estimate  whether  the  bill 
with  or  without  them  will  be  most  favorable  to  our  profit, 
if  we  make  further  contracts.  My  motive  in  the  effort 
made  was,  sincerely  :  Jirst,  for  the  good  of  the  government  ; 
second,  that  it  might  appear  that  all  merchants  who  became 
contractors  were  not  inevitably,  because  in  business  con- 
nections with  the  government — selfish  sharpers. 

The  record  we  have  made  to  date  is  a  clear  one  ;  we  are 
content  to  be  judged  by  it.      I  regard  it  as  most  fortunate 


17 


that,  without  knowledge  that  any  such  legislation  was 
pending,  it  happened  in  my  way  to  place  our  record  with 
the  Naval  Committee. 

If  in  the  course  of  the  debate  sweeping  animadversion 
may  be  made  upon  contractors  under  the  system  hitherto, 
your  sentiments  of  fairness,  regard  for  the  fame  of  Boston 
merchants,  and  (may  I  presume  !)  your  confidence  in  the 
undersigned,  may  prompt  you  to  speak  in  reply. 

With  reference  to  "nominal  prices,"  upon  which  so 
much  is  said,  this  is  our  reply  :  We  were  compelled  to  use 
an  old  system,  provided  by  law,  as  it  long  had  been  used 
and  accepted  by  the  department,  or  retire  from  the  com- 
petition. 

If  all  houses  who  would  be  honorable  dealers  with  the 
government  thus  retired  from  the  field,  the  government, 
with  a  bad  system,  would  be  entirely  in  bad  hands. 

We  did  our  part,  as  soon  as  we  comprehended  the  evils 
of  the  system,  in  recording  our  regret  that  they  existed, 
and  our  desire  for  their  remedy. 

With  a  renewal  of  thanks  for  your  courtesy, 

I  am  yours,  respectfully  and  truly, 

Franklin  W.  Smith. 

Hon.  D.  W.  GoocH,    Washington,  D.  C. 

Through  the  concurrent  effort  of  Hon.  Messrs.  Gooch 
and  Sedgwick,  and  in  accordance  with  the  recommenda- 
tions of  Smith  Brothers  &  Co.,  the  joint  resolution 
approved  March  3,  1863,  which  was  in  place  of  that 
recommitted  in  February,  provided  that  **  every  contract 
shall  require  the  delivery  of  a  specified  quantity." 

This  requirement  of  the  law,  that  the  Navy  Depart- 
ment should  contract  for  fixed  quantities,  caused  nominal 
prices  to  disappear  at  once  from  the  bids  upon  the  next 
proposals  for  supplies. 

Thus,  as  was  remarked  to  Mr.  Sedgwick,  "  paradoxi- 
cal as  it  may  appear  to  some  minds,  contractors  have 
been  reformers!' 


FARTHER  EFFORTS  OF  FRANKLIN  W.  SMITH 

TO    IMPROVE   THE    SYSTEM    FOR 

PURCHASE  AND  PROTECTION  OF  NAYAL  SUPPLIES. 


PARX    SHCOBdl. 

[Correspondence — Senate  Report,  p.  22. \ 

Navy  Agent's  Office, 

Boston,   December  i,  1853. 
Franklin  W.   Smith,  Esq., 

Sir  :  In  a  communication,  under  date  of  the  17th  ultimo, 
Hon.  Charles  B.  Sedgwick,  Commissioner  of  the  Naval 
Code,  expresses  a  desire  to  obtain  from  "gentlemen  prac- 
tically acquainted  with  the  subject,"  information  as  to  "the 
best  and  most  economical  mode  of  purchase  of  supplies  for 
the  navy,  and  the  one  most  likely  to  protect  the  govern- 
ment from  fraud. ' ' 

Among  others,  he  submits  the  following  questions  : 

First.  * '  Whether  the  present  contract  system  might  be 
modified  and  changed  so  as  to  avoid  objection  and  prevent 
fraud." 

Second.  "Whether  anymore  thorough  and  strict  sys- 
tem of  inspection  and  accounting  for  supplies  and  material 
purchased  ought  to  be  adopted  to  secure  the  department 
against  imposition." 

I  should  be  glad  to  have  you  state  your  judgment  upon 
these  questions,  to   be  inclosed  to  the   Commissioner,  as 
suggested  by  your  observation  and  experience  during  the 
period  of  your  business  relations  with  the  department. 
I  am,  sir,  very  respectfully, 

Your  obedient  servant, 

E.  L.  Norton,  Navy  Agent. 

Franklin  W.  Smith,  Esq.,  Boston. 

18 


19 

Boston,  December  ii,  1863. 
Hon.  E.  L.  Norton, 

Sir  :  I  respond  with  pleasure  to  your  request  for  the 
statement  of  my  judgment  upon  inquiries  submitted  by  the 
Commissioner  of  the  Naval  Code,  viz.  : 

First.  "  Whether  the  present  contract  system  might  be 
modified  and  changed,  so  as  to  avoid  objection  and  prevent 
fraud." 

Second.  "  Whether  any  more  thorough  and  strict  sys- 
tem of  inspection  and  accounting  for  supplies  and  materials 
purchased  ought  to  be  adopted  to  secure  the  department 
against  imposition." 

"  The  joint  resolution  regulating  contracts  with  the  Navy 
Department,"  approved  march  3,  1863,  provided  "that 
every  contract  shall  require  the  delivery  of  a  specific  quan- 
tity." This  was  a  decided  reformation  of  the  old  system 
for  unlimited  supplies,  upon  the  lowest  aggregate  bid  upon 
a  quantity  ;  which  left  upon  the  published  report  of  the 
department,  for  several  years,  such  absurd  records  of 
government  bargains. 

In  a  communication  addressed  by  me  to  the  chairman  of 
the  Committee  on  Naval  Affairs,  in  February,  1863,  the 
prediction  was  made  that  if  the  Navy  Department  would 
advertise  for  ' '  no  more  and  no  less  ' '  than  the  quantity  to 
be  received  under  the  contract,  fictitious  and  excessive 
prices,  which  had  been  an  evil  and  a  reproach,  would  dis- 
appear. Existing  contracts  for  specific  quantities,  executed 
under  the  present  law,  demonstrate  the  truth  of  the  asser- 
tion. By  this  reform,  therefore,  the  most  prominent  evils 
of  past  years  have  been  removed. 

Yet  additional  safeguards  of  law,  scrupulously  applied  by 
the  authorities,  are  requisite  before  the  confidence  of  the 
community  can  be  commanded,  and  before  there  can  be 
certainty  that  the  obligations  of  contractors  are  faithfully 
fulfilled. 

These  safeguards  are  required  as  to  the  following 
questions  : 

First.  Is  there  assurance  to  the  public  of  absolute  fair- 
ness in  the  reception  of  bids  and  award  of  contracts? 


20 


Second.  Are  the  schedules  of  merchandise  for  which 
bids  are  invited  sufficiently  explicit  in  the  description  of 
merchandise  to  be  furnished  ? 

Third.  Is  the  system  for  the  receipt  of  merchandise  so 
systematically  protected  that  government  cannot  be  de- 
frauded in  quantity  or  quality  ? 

For  satisfaction  to  the  mercantile  community  upon  the 
first  inquiry  above  suggested,  it  must  be  known  that  all 
preliminary  arrangements  for  the  award  of  contracts  are 
scrupulously  guarded  against  collusion  of  clerks  with 
favored  parties,  and  against  inaccuracy  in  computations  or 
irregularity  in  the  form  of  bids. 

The  advertisement  for  proposals  should  state  that  the 
opening  of  bids  (no  longer,  as  formerly,  in  secret  with 
chiefs  and  clerks  of  bureaus),  is  by  law  provided  to  be  in  the 
presence  of  bidders. 

Bids  should  be  received  in  closed  safes  prepared  for  the 
purpose,  secured  against  all  inspection  until  the  hour  of 
opening  named  in  the  advertisement.  Then,  in  presence 
of  competing  parties  or  their  agents,  they  should  be  with- 
drawn, sorted  and  stamped  with  a  seal  privately  retained 
by  chiefs  of  bureaus  for  the  purpose. 

No  bids  should  be  received  after  the  hour  of  opening. 

Bids  should  not  be  indorsed  with  the  numbers  of  the 
classes  named  within  them. 

{From  such  indorsements  it  may  be  learned  by  clerks  that 
there  are  no  bids  for  certain  classes  ;  and  through  collusion, 
exorbitant  prices  may  be  named  for  said  classes.  It  is  be- 
lieved that  in  the  case  of  certaifi  contracts  where  enormous 
prices  were  obtained,  such  wrongful  advantage  must  have 
been  employed.') 

All  bids  containing  erroneous  computations,  omissions  of 
prices  for  any  articles,  figures  or  writing  in  pencil,  or  hav- 
ing other  suspicious  appearances  or  informalities,  should  be 
rejected. 

{Bids  have  been  received  containing  several  arithmetical 
errors,  but  all  against  the  gov erjiment,  wherein,  while  prices 
have  been  exorbitant,  the  extensions  have  been  minus,  and 
the  aggregate  the  lowest.  It  is  a  discreditable  fact  that  such 
bids   have   been  actually  executed  in  co7itract.       Ordinary 


21 


mathematical  calculatiofis,  iii  private  life  made  sure  with  the 
grocer  and  baker,  have  passed  the  inspection  and  notice  of 
government  offices,  grossly  erroneous ;  the  result  of  these 
errors  being  in  such  loss  to  government  and  such  gain  to  the 
contractor  as  to  suggest  that  they  could  not  have  been  in  all 
intents  wis- calculations?) 

The  opening  of  bids  should  be  at  a  continuous  sitting  if 
practicable. 

If  adjournment  be  necessary,  unopened  bids  should  be 
secured  from  the  inspection  of  all  parties  in  the  interim. 

Examination  of  computations  and  forms  should  be  made 
only  in  the  offices  of  the  department ;  and  for  no  purpose 
whatever  should  bids  be  removed  therefrom  until  contracts 
have  been  executed. 

{histances  have  bee7i  remarked  where  bids  for  different 
yards  have  been  taken  by  clerks  to  their  homes  for  exam,- 
ination.') 

These  details  are  by  no  means  over-cautious  in  transac- 
tions which  involve  not  only  large  expenditures  of  money, 
but  the  good  faith  of  government  toward  the  people. 
Officers  who  have  in  charge  such  important  business  inter- 
ests should  7iot  be  satisfied  -jnerely  with  their  own  belief  that 
there  is  no  wrong  committed.  They  should  be  eager  to 
arrange  evidence  for  the  pnbHc,  that  710  wrong  can  be 
committed. 

Thirdly.  Is  the  system  for  the  rfeceipt  of  merchandise 
so  systematically  protected  that  government  cannot  be 
defrauded  in  quantity  or  quality  ? 

This  is  a  question  vital  to  the  interests  of  the  government 
under  any  systefn  of  purchase.  No  fairness  of  price,  no 
high  standard  of  quaHty,  can  compete  against  the  fraudu- 
lent collusion  of  dishonest  traders  with  weighmasters  and 
receiving  clerks. 

Suspicions  have  long  existed  as  to  the  prevalence  of  this 
style  of  robbery  in  navy  yards.  Indeed,  it  is  frequently 
remarked,  as  an  irremediable  evil,  that  government  must 
be  robbed  to  some  extent  in  the  delivery  of  merchandise  ; 
because  it  is  inevitable  that  there  will  be  some  dishonest 
men.     Yet  because  of  this  extraordinary  exposure  to  wrong, 


22 


extraordinary  protective  and  detective  measures  are  de- 
manded at  the  hands  of  executive  officers  in  the  depart- 
ments. A  system  should  be  devised  so  thorough  in  its 
checks  and  counterchecks,  that  rogues  cannot  disarrange 
its  machinery  without  being  caught  in  its  traps. 

I  do  not  hesitate  to  state  as  my  beUef,  based  upon 
unusual  facilities  for  judgment,  that  there  is  not  at  present 
a  system  in  navy  yards  sufficiently  protective  against  short 
weights  and  measures. 

Doors  are  open  which  should  be  closed  and  doubly 
locked. 

There  are  means  for  the  perpetration  of  this  wrong,  with- 
out and  beyond  the  knowledge  of  the  naval  storekeeper, 
who  may  be  honest  meanwhile  in  the  exercise  of  his  func- 
tions. I  am  aware  this  is  an  important  statement.  It  is 
made  in  full  conviction  of  its  importance  and  its  truth. 

It  must  be  entirely  practicable  to  remedy  all  exposure  to 
this  evil,  and,  through  enterprise  and  ingenuity,  not  only 
to  devise  an  effective  system  of  protection  against  fraud  in 
the  delivery  of  merchandise,  but  to  insure  its  faithful 
execution. 


The  Bank  of  England,  in  its  internal  administration,  is 
like  an  apartment  walled  with  mirrors  ;  each  action  therein 
is  reflected  in  various  directions  to  the  observation  of  others, 
as  honest  or  dishonest. 

When  the  Navy  Department  is  developed  upon  so  vast 
a  scale  as  to  require  an  appropriation  of  $140,000,000,  like 
precision  in  system  will  be  required  to  afford  protection  to 
government.  As  additional  security  to  the  present  system, 
I  venture  the  suggestion  that  there  should  be  in  every  navy 
yard  a  naval  store  receiver,  as  well  as  naval  storekeeper. 

When  such  reforms  as  these,  above  detailed,  are  applied 
in  the  administration  of  the  bureaus  and  at  the  yards,  it 
will  be  difficult  to  show  objections  to  a  contract  system,  or 
opportunities  for  fraud  in  purchases  by  either  contract  or 
open  purchase. 

It  is  possible  that  the  suggestions  herein  submitted  may 


23 


be  regarded  as  intrusive  by  some  to  whose  official  functions 
they  have  special  relation. 

Yet  it  may  without  presumption  be  assumed  that  the 
business  transactions  with  the  department  of  the  house  of 
which  the  writer  is  a  member,  amounting  to  more  than  a 
million  of  dollars,  and  demanding  of  him  during  two  years 
almost  daily  visitation  of  the  workshops  and  offices  of  the 
navy  yard,  involving  the  supply  of  a  great  variety  of 
articles  entering  into  consumption  and  use  throughout  the 
mechanical  departments  and  on  shipboard,  ought  to  have 
furnished  to  a  merchant  facihties  for  judgment  as  to  the 
system  in  practice  entitled  to  some  consideration. 

Faithful  officers  of  the  government  who  would  vigilantly 
guard  its  interests  and  exact  its  claims  will  invite  the 
thorough  scrutiny  and  welcome  the  respectful  suggestion 
of  citizens,  as  zealous  as  themselves  for  the  welfare  of 
government,  and  contributing,  perhaps,  as  much  to  its 
support. 

An  ex- President  of  the  United  States  has  said  :  "  It  is  a 
condition  for  the  enjoyment  of  liberty  that  our  rulers  be 
narrowly  watched.  It  can  never  be  long  preserved  without 
popular  jealousy.  It  is  a  maxim  of  despots  that  the  people 
should  never  inquire  into  the  concerns  of  government." 

Transactions  with  government  have  been  subject  to  such 
general  suspicion  that  merchants  sensitive  to  their  good 
name  are  reluctant  to  engage  in  them,  exposing  themselves 
to  disparagement  and  scandal.  Yet  shall  those  of  the  mer- 
cantile community  who  would  maintain  their  own  integrity 
abandon  the  comipetition  ?  Or  shall  they  enter  the  lists,  to 
strive  against  temptation  to  themselves  and  for  its  removal 
from  others? 

The  case  seems  to  be  this  :  Rogues,  as  may  be  expected, 
approach  government  for  business.  Executive  officers  are 
not  sufficiently  expert  for  their  detection  ;  therefore,  all 
who  solicit  government  patronage  are  under  distrust  and 
suspicion. 

Again  :    It  is  not  through  the  dereliction  of  citizen  con 
tractors  alone  that  government  may  be  defrauded.       Evi 
dence  is  on  record  that  government  employes,   either  by 
mal-intent  or  through  inadvertence,  have  been  as  greatly 


24 


in  fault.      Results  may  be  known   outside  of  government 
offices  which  are  individual  secrets  within  them. 

sK  *  *  *        .  * 

While  in  compliance  with  your  request,  and  under  im- 
pression of  the  importance  of  the  subject,  I  have  frankly 
advocated  amendment  in  details  of  administration,  it  has 
been  without  the  least  impulse  of  disrespect  for  officers  of 
the  government  or  the  disparagement  of  their  services  ;  but 
for  a  record  against  evils  from  which  the  business  world 
believes  our  government  to  receive  material  injury. 

We  improved  the  earliest  opportunity  after  apprehending 
the  evils  of  the  contract  system  (in  1861),  to  expose  them 
to  the  department,  remarking  :  ' '  We  shall  be  glad  to  aid 
any  effort  to  replace  it  by  one  more  distinct  in  its  demands 
upon  the  seller  of  merchandise,  and  therefore  far  more 
agreeable  to  those  who  would  be  honorable  competitors  for 
government  patronage. " 

It  was  a  gratification  that  opportunity  occurred  to  press 
legislation  for  this  purpose,  and  that  reform  was  accomp- 
lished, during  the  subsequent  period,  as  observation 
informed  of  remaining  facilities  for  wrong,  impatience  has 
been  felt  for  their  removal. 

At  a  time  when  our  government  is  engaged  in   an  ex- 
haustive struggle  for  life,  I   have  been  compelled  as  a  citi- 
zen to  urge  its  protection  against  unfaithfulness  in  its  service 
and  fraud  by  those  enjoying  its  patronage. 
I  remain,  sir,  most  respectfully, 
Your  obedient  servant, 

Franklin  W.  Smith. 


THE   PAMPHLET  OF  F.  W.   SMITH 

EXPOSING    FRAUDS    IN    CONTRACTS 

WITH  THE  NAVY  DEPARTMENT. 

Its  Investigation   and    Endorsement   by  a   Special  Committee  of 

the  United  States  Senate. 

THE    PLOT    FOR    REVENGE. 

PART    THIRD. 

Letter  to  the  Secretary  of  the  Navy,  with  art  ajialysis  of  cer- 
tain contracts  of  the  N'avy  Departme?it,  as  appendix  to 
paper  addressed  to  the  Commissioner  of  the  Naval  Code. 

[Privately  printed  for  the  Secretary  of  the  Navy  and  the  Com- 
mittees on  Naval  Affairs  of  the  Senate  and  House  of  Repre- 
sentatives.] 

Boston,  January  29,  1864. 
To  THE  Hon.  the  Secretary  of  the  Navy, 

Sir  :  In  the  communication  to  the  Commissioner  of  the 
naval  code,  copy  of  which  I  had  the  honor  to  address  to 
you  on  the  29th  ultimo,  reference  was  made  to  the  errone- 
ous computations  and  eyionnous  prices  of  certain  contracts 
by  which  it  was  believed  that  the  government  had  suffered 
loss. 

At  that  time  the  statement  was  fully  warranted  upon  the 
personal  knowledge  of  the  writer.  The  suggestion  of  the 
existence  of  such  wrong  to  the  department  was  supposed 
by  him  to  be  the  entire  fulfilment  of  his  duty.  Facts 
which  have  subsequently  been  made  public  compel  him 
now,  in  faithfulness  to  the  country  and  to  himself,  to  place 
before  you  a  more  distinct  statement  of  the  case. 

The  Boston  fournal  recently  published  a  copy  of  one  of 
these  suspicious  contracts — that,  wherein  $150  per  dozen 

25 


26 


were  paid  for  wrenches  worth  $io  to  $15  per  dozen.  The 
writer  of  that  article  proceeds  to  explain  the  transaction,  ' '  in 
justice  to  the  Navy  Department,"  as  attributable  to  the 
system  (formerly  existing  under  law  of  1855),  of  bidding  at 
high  prices  and  low  prices,  according  to  the  quantities 
Hkely  to  be  required.  This  theory  was  probably  accepted 
from  the  speech  of  Senator  Grimes  (Cong.  Globe,  Jan.  9), 
I  ut  is  altogether  erroneous  ;  since  all  the  prices  were  ex- 
orbitant, and  the  quantities  limited  under  the  act  of  March, 
1863. 

It  was  also  asserted  that  the  bid  was  a  fair  specimen  of 
the  bids  for  every  contract ;  when,  in  fact,  the  contract 
mentioned  (and  others  on  record  as  bad),  is  exceptio7ial, 
extraordinary,  and  must  have  had  a  peculiar  history. 

Some  contracts  have  appeared  in  the  reports  of  the 
bureaus  of  an  unprecedented  character.  The  only  expla- 
nation for  them  yet  made  to  the  public  is  incorrect  ;  in 
fact,  their  pecuHar  history  is  as  yet  a  secret.  In  the  absence 
of  authentic  statements,  false  and  exaggerated  theories  are 
applied  ;  scandal  becomes  excessive  and  wide-spread. 
Suppressio  veri,  suggestio  falsi. 

It  is  especially  unjust  that  merchants  who  have  had  no 
part  in  wrongful  acts  should  be  defamed  in  mass  with  those 
who  have  committed  them.  If  obloquy  is  to  be  scattered 
broadcast  over  all  concerned  with  government,  because  of 
the  dishonor  of  individuals  ;  if  integrity  is  not  to  be  recog- 
nized when  found,  and  vindicated  from  undeserved  suspicion 
and  reproach,  the  business  of  the  nation  will  be  yielded 
entirely  to  those  who  care  not  for  reputation,  having  none 
to  defend. 

We  are  not  willing  to  share  with  others,  in  the  least 
degree,  the  imputations  of  wrong  in  our  relations  to  govern- 
ment, but  will  rather  make  an  effort  to  place  the  discredit 
where  it  belongs. 

Upon  our  first  movement  for  navy  business,  in  1861,  we 
were  repelled  by  records  of  the  absurd  bargains  published 
in  the  reports  of  previous  years.  We  were  obliged  to, fol- 
low precedents  established  under  the  law,  or  retire  from 
the  competition.     The  evils  existing  could  only  be  appre- 


27 


hended  by  tracking  them  over  forbidden  ground.  We 
vigorously  joined  in  the  raid  upon  them,  by  which  the 
most  prominent  of  those  evils  were  remedied. 

During  the  period  when  contracts  could  only  be  obtained 
by  calculation  as  to  qMantities  instead  of  vahies  of  merchan- 
dise, and  consequently  by  bids  of  anomalous  prices,  we 
improved  an  opportunity  to  demonstrate  by  figures  to  the 
Bureau  of  Yards  and  Docks  that  the  average  per  cent,  of 
profit  to  us  did  not  exceed  or  equal  a  fair  mercantile  rate. 
We  invite,  and  will  aid  in  like  manner,  the'utmost  scrutiny 
of  all  our  transactions  with  the  department. 

The  files  of  the  bureaus,  and  the  testimony  of  members 
of  Congress  from  Massachusetts,  will  witness  that  we  have 
advocated  the  remedy  of  abuses  at  once  upon  their  dis- 
covery. The  following  pages  will  discover  an  onerous  task 
assumed  in  this  service. 


In  full  confidence  of  your  eager  desire  for  the  detection 
and  remedy  of  abuses  in  the  administration  of  the  Navy 
Department,  and  realizing  that  amid  your  most  arduous 
and  important  services  for  the  country  you  must  necessarily 
be  uninformed. of  such  statements  as  are  annexed,  they  are 
respectfully  submitted  to  your  consideration. 
I  remain,  sir,  most  respectfully. 

Your  obedient  servant, 

Franklin  W.  Smith. 
To  THE  Hon.  Secretary  of  the  Navy. 


With  this  letter,  Mr.  Smith's  pamphlet  was  presented 
to  the  Secretary  of  the  Navy,  in  person,  and  in  company 
with  Hon.  A.  H,  Rice,  of  Massachusetts.  It  was  subse- 
quently printed  in  full  in  the  Report  of  the  Select  Com- 
mittee on  Naval  Supplies  of  the  U.  S.  Senate,  July  4. 
1864,  and  quoted  by  Hon.  John  P.  Hale  in  his  speech 
in  the  Senate,  in  defense  of  the  Report. 


28 


The  pamphlet  was  a  mathematical  analysis  of  certain 
contracts,  covering  thirty-eight  pages,  and  with  the  annexed 
recapitulation  : 

Statement  of  loss  to  governmerit  up07i  contracts  analyzed  : 

Amounts  of  the  Excess  in  these  contracts  above 

contracts  as  market  rates,  at  prices  on 

awarded.  other  bids  of  the  same  time. 

$11, 860    GO $1,262    GO 

i6,g6g  gg  .    . 3.25G  GG 

1,278  65 635  GG 

652  50 405  50 

1,370  OG 4GG  GG 

4,807  2G I, GOG  GG 

1,200  GO 912  50 

6,545  GG 581  GO 

4,227  50 1,692  50 

8,054  00 2,265  GO 

21,61218  ii,2g8  40  ! 

280  GO 125  00 

1,400  GO 300  GO 

2,350  GO 200  OG 

•9,760  GG 1,760  00 

4,687  OG 2,094  16  ! 


$96,144    03  $28,091    06 

Thus  it  appears  that  the  government  suffered,  on  awards 
of  $96,144.03,  the  amount  of  $28,091.06,  and  by  erroneous 
computations  $4,476.99.     Total,  $32,568.05. 

The  analysis  above,  with  the  statement  of  aggregate  loss 
to  government,  all  apply  to  the  awards  under  advertise- 
ments of  Bureau  of  Construction  and  Engineering  of  Feb- 
ruary, 1863,  with  the  exception  of  one  erroneous 
computation  from    the    Bureau   of  Yards   and    Docks. 


Awards  In  June. 

On  the  morning  of  the  24th  of  June,  1863,  the  Secre- 
tary of  the   Navy,   acting    upon    special  warning  from 


29 


Senator  Sumner,*  took  measures  for  the  protection  of 
an  opening  of  bids  to  be  made  that  day.  Several  mer- 
cantile houses  of  Boston  were  by  mutual  arrangement 
represented  on  the  occasion.  The  opening  was,  accord- 
ing to  their  request,  prosecuted  through  a  continuous 
sitting.  Bids  were  inspected,  copies  taken,  etc.,  etc. 
The  interesting  revelations  made  at  that  time  do  not 
appear  in  the  reports  of  the  bureaus  ;  but  were  fully  re- 
vealed subsequently  in  the  Senate  Report. 

The  pamphlet  above  mentioned  was  referred  by  the 
Secretary  of  the  Navy  to  Chiefs  of  Bureaus  for  examina- 
tion and  reply.  It  received  only  acrimonious  comments 
evasive  of  its  figures  and  conclusions.  To  these  replies 
Mr.  Smith  made  a  rejoinder.  For  the  entire  correspon- 
dence, Vide  Sen.  Report,  pp.  44-60. 


Extracts  from   "  Rejoinder  "  of   F.   W.  Smith  to  the  Chiefs 
of  Bureaus. 


"  Charges,  such  as  these,  wer  not  made  without  careful 
consideration.  The  evidence  upon  which  they  are  based, 
after  compilation  from  the  Report  of  the  Secretary  of  the 
Navy,  was  examined  in  detail  by  gentlemen,  whose  com- 
petent judgment  of  evidence  would  be  admitted. 

* '  After  the  paper  was  placed  in  type  for  greater  distinct- 
ness, the  proof  was  submitted  to  a  counsellor  of  this  city, 
eminent  for  character  as  ability,  f  Upon  a  critical  examina- 
tion thereof,  in  connection  with  the  Secretary's  Report,  he 
pronounced  it  a  conclusive  statement  of  evidence,  sufficient 
to  prove  the  allegation  to  any  intelligent  jury  beyond  a 

*  Through  information  from  Members  of  Congress  in  Boston, 
communicated  by  F.  W.  Smith. 

tThe  late  Hon.  Edward  S.  Rand  of  Boston. 


30 


reasonable  doubt  ;  and  furthermore  declared  it  my  personal 
duty  as  a  citizen  to  place  said  paper  with  the  Secretary  of 
the  Navy,  that  the  serious  wrong  discovered  might  be 
thoroughly  investigated.  In  this  opinion  of  my  duty  mem- 
bers of  Congress  fully  concurred. 

''  The  unpleasant  and,  as  might  have  been  expected, 
thankless  duty  was  performed." 

The  statement  closed  as  follows': 

"  The  above  review  of  all  points  bearing  upon  the  serious 
allegation  which  is  set  aside  as  '  hypothetical  and  imagin- 
ary,' leaves  the  evidence  of  its  truth  still  unbroken  and 
conclusive.  The  unanimous  verdict  of  those  to  whom  it  is 
submitted  successively  for  examination  (beyond  those  who 
assume  an  attitude  of  defense),  is  that  the  facts  collated  sus- 
tain the  charge. 

"  I  doubt  not  but  that  an  inteUigent  jury,  or  a  committee 
of  the  Boston  Board  of  Trade,  would  indorse  the  opinion 
of  the  legal  gentleman  under  whose  advice  I  have  per- 
formed this  unwelcome  duty,  viz. :  That  the  said  *  analysis 
of  certain  contracts  '  proves,  beyond  a  reasonable  doubt, 
that  certain  contractors  could  not  have  obtained  the 
extraordinarily  profitable  contracts  in  question  through  any 
mere  chance  of  bidding  ;  but  that  through  information,  by 
collusion,  said  results  were  obtained. 

"  Besides,  however,  the  internal  evidence  of  the  Report 
of  the  Secretary  which  the  writer  has  collated,  (at  expense 
of  personal  labor,  time  and  money,  and  exposure  to  resent- 
ful attacks),  there  cayi  be  other  collateral  evidence  to  substa?i- 
tiate  the  truth. 

"  I  cannot  conclude  without  again  soHciting  your  atten- 
tion to  the  resentful  disposition  of  the  chiefs  in  reply. 
Their  unwarranted  insinuation  and  weak  satire  will  have 
full  exposure  in  a  subsequent  paper.  The  communication 
which  required  their  attention,  so  far  from  implying  distrust 
of  ehher  of  those  functionaries,  referred  to  them  in  terms  of 
confidence  personally,  of  respect  for  their  ability,  and  con- 
sideration of  their  arduous  labors.  It  was  not,  therefore, 
to  have  been  anticipated  that  evidence  of  wrong  within  their 


31 


offices,  the  suspicion  of  which,  as  was  remarked  to  the 
writer  by  the  Secretary,  was  not  new  in  the  department, 
would  be  set  aside  as  '  hypothetical  and  imaginary,'  and 
returned  with  angry  recrimination.  Yet,  despite  this  ready 
dismissal  by  the  bureaus,  the  importance  of  this  evidence, 
in  fact  and  inference,  will  remain. 

"  I  am,  sir,  very  respectfully, 

' '  Your  obedient  servant, 

"Franklin  W.  Smith. 
**  Hon.  John  P.   Hale, 

"  Chairman  of  the  Senate   Select   Committee  on  Naval 
Supplies. ' ' 

Reports  of  these  revelations,  by  Mr.  Smith,  reached 
Congress,  and  resulted  in  the  appointment  of  a  *'  Special 
Committee  of  the  U.  S.  Senate,"  consisting  of  Senators 
Hale,  Buckalew  and  Doolittle  to  investigate  them. 

On  the  I  ith  of  February,  1864,  F.  W.  Smith  testified 
before  this  Committee  in  Washington,  and  subsequently 
also  at  length,  until  the  committee  had  placed  upon 
record  every  detail  of  his  "  Analysis  of  Certain  Con- 
tracts." 

The  papers  above  mentioned,  and  the  testimony,  fill 
seventy  pages  of  the  "  Senate  Report,"  of  which  3,000 
copies  were  ordered  to  be  printed. 

The  investigation  of  the  committee  lasted  four  months, 
until  their  Report  on  the  29th  of  June,  1864;  making  a 
volume  of  231  pages. 

The  following  are  extracts  from  the  Report : 


"  As  public  attention  was  first  called  to  this  subject 
directly  by  the  publication  of  a  series  of  papers  concerning 
the  purchase  of  naval  supplies,  with  an  analysis  of  certain 


32 

navy  contracts  by  Mr.  Franklin  W.  Smith,  of  Smith 
Brothers  &  Co. ,  a  mercantile  house  in  Boston,  and  as  the 
matter  then  presented  was  deemed  of  sufficient  importance 
by  the  Secretary  of  the  Navy  to  submit  the  same  to  certain 
heads  of  Bureaus  in  the  Navy  Department,  and  they  sever- 
ally made  answer  thereto,  the  committee  have  decided  to 
report  the  pamphlet  before  referred  to,  the  answers  of  the 
chiefs  of  bureaus,  and  the  rejoinder  of  Mr.  Smith  thereto, 
together  with  the  evidence  taken  in  the  case,  leaving  the 
Senate  to  form  such  conclusion  therefrom  as  the  facts  and 
allegations  therein  shall  justify. 

"  The  committee  will  now  present  to  the  Senate  certain 
statements  of  facts  which  they  think  the  evidence  by  them 
taken  will  justify.  They  have  confined  themselves  in  their 
examination  to  recent  occurrences,  thinking  that  the  latest 
transactions  will  afford  the  best  evidence  of  the  present  state 
of  affairs,  and  show  most  clearly  what  are  the  evils  for 
which  remedies  should  be  sought. 

"  In  the  first  place,  then,  your  committee  start  with  the 
announcement  that  the  investigations  which  they  have 
made  satisfy  them  beyond  a  doubt  that,  in  the  matter  of 
naval  supplies  last  year,  the  government  has  been  grossly 
defrauded  by  having  to  pay  most  exorbitant  and  enormous 
prices  for  very  many  of  the  articles  procured  by  contract 
with  the  heads  of  several  of  the  bureaus.  They  will  submit 
a  few  of  the  more  gross  and  palpable  instances  in  support 
of  this  assertion,  and  suggest  some  of  the  means  by  which 
these  frauds  have  been,  or  many  have  been,  perpetrated." 

Here  follow  several  contracts  brought  to  light  in  the 
above  "  Analysis  of  Contracts  by  F.  W.  Smith." 

j^  ijc  ^  ^  'T* 

"  At  a  time  like  the  present,  when  taxes  are  so  high, 
and  the  burden  of  the  war  falls  so  heavily  on  the  people, 
they  have  a  right  to  expect  and  demand  from  those  intrusted 
with  the  disbursement  of  the  pubHc  money  fidelity,  vigi- 
lance, and  economy. 

"  In  conclusion,  your  committee  submit  the  following  as 
the  result  of  the  examination  they  have  made  : 


"  I .  In  the  matter  of  contracts  for  naval  supplies  last 
year,  the  government  has  been  grossly  defrauded. 

"  2.  These  frauds  could  not  have  been  perpetrated  with- 
out aid  from  those  in  the  employment  of  government  in  the 
bureaus. 

"3.  These  remarks  apply  to  the  Bureau  of  Steam 
Engineering,  the  Bureau  of  Construction,  etc.,  and  the 
Bureau  of  Yards  and  Docks." 

Views  Submitted  by  MR.  BUCKALEW. 

"2.  The  undersigned  concurs  in  the  conclusion  drawn 
in  the  report  from  the  evidence,  that  in  particular  cases  of 
contracts  for  naval  suppHes  the  successful  bidders  had  infor- 
mation from  the  department  with  regard  to  the  biddings, 
or  assistance  therein  in  arranging  their  bids  to  secure  suc- 
cess. No  other  explanation  of  several  of  these  contracts 
can  be  reasonably  given." 

•1^  •T^  •T»  "T^  T^ 

"  3.  This  inquiry  into  this  subject  of  naval  contracts 
mainly  arose  upon  an  exposition  of  them  by  Franklin  W. 
Smith,  a  merchant  of  Boston,  and  the  evidence  and  papers 
herewith  reported  will  show  the  thoroughness  and  ability 
with  which  his  examination  was  made,  and  the  particular 
replies  on  the  different  points  given  thereto  on  behalf  of  the 
department.  The  recriminations  against  him  appear  in  the 
replies  and  in  the  testimony  taken  before  the  committee. 
There  can  be  no  question  of  his  intelligence  and  capacity, 
nor  would  it  be  unreasonable  to  assert  that  the  public  are 
indebted  to  him  for  much  of  valuable  information  upon  the 
subjects  covered  by  this  investigation.  Since  his  examina- 
tion before  the  committee,  he  has  been  arrested  at  Boston, 
it  is  believed  at  the  instance  of  the  Navy  Department,  upon 
some  accusation  or  allegation  of  over-charge  or  imposition 
in  furnishing  naval  supplies.  It  is  to  be  hoped,  for  the 
credit  of  the  government,  that  this  arrest,  following  close 
upon  his  examination  before  the  committee,  will  be  fully 
justified  upon  due  investigation  and  fair  trial,  and  that  the 
proceeding  will  be  relieved  from  all  appearance  of  persecu- 
tion or  vengeance.  *'C.  R.  BuCKALEW." 


34 


Immediately  upon  the  publication  of  this  Report, 
rumors  of  retaliation  upon  F.  W.  Smith,  by  officials  of 
the  Navy  Department  reached  Boston,  and  were  brought 
in  person  by  Hon.  J.  P.  Hale,  on  his  way  to  New  Hamp- 
shire, who  called  at  the  warehouse  of  Smith  Brothers, 
and  said  '*  The  Navy  Department  will  slaughter  Franklin 
W.  Smith." 


A   Preliminary  Assault  of  the   Navy  Department  in  the  U.  S. 

Senate. 

On  the  23d  of  May,  1864,  the  Senator  from  Iowa, 
spoke  at  length  in  reply  to  an  adverse  report  by  the 
Committee  on  Naval  Supplies,  upon  a  proposition  from 
the  Navy  Department,  that  purchases  should  be  made 
by  regular  officers  of  the  Navy,  instead  of  Navy  agents 
who  were  civilians. 

Extract  from    Correspondence    of  the  ''BOSTON   DAILY 
ADVERTISER,"  June  8,  1864. 

"  Our  readers  will  observe  that  the  Senator  singled  out 
"  Mr.  Franklin  W.  Smith,  of  Smith  Brothers  &  Co.,  for 
"  his  severest  denunciation.  In  doing  this  the  Senator  did 
"  great  injustice  to  the  house  in  question.  As  to  the  injus- 
'  *  tice,  we  will  call  attention  to  the  letter  by  Mr.  Franklin 
"  W.  Smith,  embodied  in  Mr.  Hale's  reply,  which,  we 
"  believe,  supplies  a  complete  answer  to  the  substance  of 
"  the, charges  made  by  Mr.  Grimes. 

"It  is  proper  to  add  that,  at  the  close  of  the  debate, 
"  Mr.  Sumner  rose  to  express  his  confidence  in  the  entire 
' '  good  faith  with  which  the  Messrs.  Smith  had  dealt  witii 
"  the  government. 

"  Nearly  the  whole  Massachusetts'  delegation  in  both 
"  Houses,  we  believe,  would  have  joined  in  this  expression  ; 
"  and  one  member,  himself  a  merchant  of  high  standing  in 


35 


"  this  city,  who  knows  their  course  thoroughly,  has  said 
*  *  that  not  only  have  their  transactions  been  honorable  and 
''  executed  faithfully,  but  that  they  have  labored  diligently 
' '  to  break  up  that  system  of  awarding  contracts  which  has 
' '  been  the  source  of  so  much  fraudulent  dealing  with  the 
"  government.  It  is,  indeed,  the  fact,  we  believe,  that 
"  Mr.  Franklin  W.  Smith  has  acted  as  a  zealous  reformer 
"  in  this  matter,  and  is  now  meeting  the  reformer's  custo- 
"  mary  reward,  after  having  been  largely  instrumental  in 
"  overturning  the  old  system  of  fictitious  bidding.'.' 

In  proof  of  the  vindictive  character  of  this  attack, 
the  following  fact  is  stated  :  Haying  heard  that  it  was 
intended,  Mr.  F.  W.  Smith,  with  his  brother,  and  part- 
ner Mr.  Benjamin  G.  Smith,  met  the  Senator  from  Iowa 
in  the  Senate  ante-chamber  and  placed  with  him  copies 
of  the  printed  correspondence  of  F.  W.  Smith  with  the 
Secretary  of  the  Navy  and  Chiefs  of  Bureaus,  herein 
above  cited,  in  advocacy  of  the  reform  which  he  finally 
accomplished,  calling  the  Senator's  attention  to  their 
date  as  early  as  February,  1862,  and  before  the  comple- 
tion of  their  first  contract.  Vet  with  this  correspondence 
in  his  ha7ids,  the  Senator  insinuated  to  the  contrary,  by 
an  interrogation  in  his  speech  :  "  Did  they  ever  address 
the  Department  on  the  subject  ?  " 

Hon.  John  P.  Hale  replied  at  once  in  support  of  the 
Report  of  the  Naval  Committee,  and  in  vindication  of 
Mr.  Smith. 


se 


Extracts  from    Speech    of  HON.    JOHN  P.   HALE,    of   New 

Hampshire,  in  the  United  States  Senate, 

May  23,  1864,  (as  follows)  : 

^  yf.  "^  ^  ^ 

' '  A  great  portion  of  the  labor  of  this  effort  of  the  Sena- 
tor is  made  upon  Mr.  Smith,  of  the  firm  of  Smith  Brothers 
&  Co.,  of  Boston.  Let  me  say  this  of  Mr.  Smith  :  I  know 
him  ;  he  is  a  merchant  of  the  highest  character  ;  of  unim- 
peachable integrity,  and  unblemished  reputation  with  all 
who  know  him.  There  is  not  a  mercantile  house  in  Boston, 
and  that  is  a  place,  I  think,  where  the  standard  of  mercan- 
tile integrity  is  as  high  as  it  is  in  any  city  of  this  Union — 
there  is  not  a  mercantile  house  nor  a  mercantile  man  in 
Boston  whose  reputation  excels  that  of  Mr.  Smith.  Mr. 
vSmith  is  not  only  a  man  eminent  in  the  walks  of  mercantile 
and  private  life,  of  unspotted  integrity,  and  of  unsuspected 
fairness,  but,  beside  all  that,  he  is  an  able  man  ;  he  is  a 
keen  man  as  well  as  an  honest  man  ;  and  do  3^ou  want  to 
know  the  secret  of  this  hostility  to  Mr.  S7nith?^^-  I  have  it 
in  my  hand  here  now  (holding  up  the  pamphlets  of  Mr. 
Franklin  W.  Smith). 

"  When  the  report  of  the  Secretary  of  the  Navy  com- 
municated to  the  two  Houses  of  Congress,  on  the  7th  of 
December  last,  was  published,  Mr.  Smith  saw,  as  every  man 
can  see  that  will  look  at  it,  evidence  of  the  grossest  and 
most  outrageous  frauds  under  the  published  evidence  of 
the  Secretary  of  the  Navy — not  one  of  them  perpetrated 
through  the  agency  of  the  Navy  agents.  As  became  a  man 
of  integrity  and  of  keen  intellect,  he,  in  a  little  pamphlet 
which  I  hold  in  my  hand,  exposed  some  of  these  frauds 
perpetrated,  not  through  Navy  agents,  but  through  officials 
here  at  Washington.  He  exposed  them  in  his  pamphlet. 
Let  me  call  your  attention  to  one  or  two  of  them." 


*  Quotation  of  these  personal  allusions  to  the  defendant  will  be 
pardoned  in  view  of  the  malignant  disparagement  which  they 
would  counteract.  The  gentle  proprieties  of  ordinary  life  are 
perforce  suspended  in  a  mortal  conflict  for  life's  chief  treasure — a 
spotless  reputat^ion. 


37 


(The  contracts  cited  and  the  details  of  wrong  and  loss 
exposed  can  be  found  in  the  official  report  of  the  debate.) 


"  Mr.  Smith  brought  these  facts  to  light  and  published 
them,  and  for  it  he  is  entitled  to  the  thanks  of  every  man 
who  desires  purity  in  the  administration  of  the  government. 
Instead  of  it  he  has  received  and  secured  to  himself,  and 
probably  to  his  children  after  him,  the  undying  hatred  of 
the  men  whose  conduct  is  thus  implicated. 


Mr.  Smith's  Vindication. 


"  Again,  Mr.  Smith  has  not  only  exposed  these  wrongs, 
but  he  has  been  guilty  of  another  gross  offense  in  the  view 
of  the  heads  of  these  bureaus.  When  his  attention  was 
first  called  to  this  subject  of  fictitious  bidding,  he  looked 
back  to  years  ago  when  it  went  on  quietly  year  after  year  ; 
and  not  a  word  was  said  against  it  ;  but  the  very  first  year 
Mr.  Smith's  attention  was  called  to  it  he  did  what  the 
Senator  said  he  ought  to  have  done  ;  he  notified  the  heads 
of  bureaus  and  the  Secretary  of  the  Navy  of  these  frauds 
by  correspondence.  He  had  correspondence,  too,  with  the 
gentleman  appointed  to  prepare  a  naval  code,  and  made  a 
suggestion  of  the  very  frauds  that  had  been  practised,  and 
the  mode  in  which  they  might  be  practised  ;  and  for  that, 
too,  he  has  committed,  in  the  eyes  of  this  gentleman,  an 
unpardonable  sin. 

' '  I  have  said  that  Mr.  Smith  is  not  only  an  honest  man, 
but  he  is  a  keen  man.  I  do  not  know  that  I  shall  be  doing 
any  injustice  to  the  Senator  from  Iowa — I  certainly  do  not 
mean  to  do  any — if  I  say  to  the  Senator  from  Iowa  that  he 
is  quite  as  keen  a  man  as  he  is,  and  I  think  he  is  a  little 
keener  in  one  respect.  The  Senator  from  Iowa — I  do  not 
mean  to  say  anything  unkind  or  disrespectful  to  him — is 
charged  and  surcharged  with  the  concentrated  venom  of  all 
the  men  that  Mr.  Smith  has  disturbed  by  writing  this 
pamphlet,  and  he  has  been  so  highly  charged  that  he  let 
some  of  it  off  before  he  made  his  sjeech  here,  as  I  think 
the  Senator  will  see  when  I  read,  as  I  propose  to  read,  Mr. 


38 


Smith's  answer  to  the  speech  of  the  gentleman,  made  before 
the  speech  was  dehvered.     I  will  read  it." 

Mr.  Hale  here  read  in  full  a  paper  prepared  by  Mr. 
F.  W.  Smith  in  reply  to  the  statements  of  the  Senator 
from  Iowa,  which  is  on  record  in  the  report  of  the 
debate.     It  closed  as  follows  : 

' '  We  hope  that  our  efforts  in  behalf  of  reform,  our  fear- 
less assertion  of  our  rights  as  merchants  in  correspondence 
with  heads  of  bureaus,  and  our  exposure  of  collusion  and 
fraud,  have  not  stimulated  an  eager  search  for  wrong  on 
our  part  which  has  no  existence  in  fact,  and  thus  called 
down  upon  us  an  unfriendly  criticism.  I  remain,  sir,  re- 
spectfully, Your  obedient  servant, 

"Franklin  W.  Smith. 
"  Hon.  John  P.  Hale, 

' '  Chairmaji  of  Senate  Committee  on  Naval  Affairs. ' ' 

Mr.  Hale  continued  : 

' '  Mr.  President,  I  have  read  this  long  communication  to 
the  Senate  because  I  thought  it  due  to  a  gentleman  whose 
character  was  thus  assailed,  and,  I  think,  as  it  will  be  pub- 
lished side  by  side  with  the  statements  of  the  Senator  from 
Iowa,  that  the  injurious  imputations  thrown  upon  the 
character  of  Mr.  Smith  will  carry  with  them  their  own 
antidote.  I  believe  there  is  no  higher  duty  that  a  Senator 
or  the  Senate  owes  to  the  country,  to  the  government  and 
to  itself,  than  to  vindicate,  whenever  it  is  unjustly  assailed, 
the  character  of  any  citizen  whose  conduct  may  be  thus 
brought  before  the  Senate.  Neither  shall  I,  at  any  time  be 
deterred  from  the  course  which  I  think  my  duty  imposes 
upon  me  in  defense  of  individual  character,  or  in  ferreting 
out  public  wrongs  wherever  I  may  believe  that  they  exist. ' ' 

•^  if.  if.    '  if.  if 

This  preparative  attack,  for  zvhich   the    material  ivas 

furnished  by  chiefs  of  bureaus,  in  full  possessio7i  of  published 

evidence  of  their  falsity,  zvas  made  on  the  2jd  of  May, 

1864.,  and  the  military  arrest  followed  on  the  lytJi  of  June. 


THE    PERSECUTION    BY    PROSECUTION 


KRANKIvIN    W.    SIVIITH. 


PAR.X    POVRXH. 

Extracts  from  "  Rules  and  Regulations  for  the  better 
Government  of  the  Navy." 

Gideon  Welles,  Secretary. 

Reg.  I2IO-I2.  ''  Explafiations  shall  be  asked  of  the 
party  at  the  time  of  the  arrests 

Reg.  1203.  "  The  person  accused  shall  be  furnished 
with  a  true  copy  of  the  charges,  with  the  specificatiori  at  the 
time  he  is  put  under  arrest. "        . 

Reg.  1205.  "  Offences  shall  not  be  allowed  to  accumu- 
late in  -  order  that  collectively  sufficient  material  may  thus  be 
found  for  a  prosec2itio7i. ' ' 

Reg.  1 21 2  provides  that  '' before  a  decision  is  made  by 
the  Secretary  whether  a  trial  shall  take  place,  explanations 
of  the  party  accused  shall  i7ivariably  accompany  the  statement 
of  facts.  ^' 


Their  Ruthless    Violation! 


A  few  weeks  after  the  warning  of  Senator  Hale, 
merchants  of  Boston,  of  whom  Smith  Brothers  had 
purchased  merchandise  for  the  Navy,  informed  them 
that  they  had  been  summoned  before  a  detective  inqui- 
sition in  Court  Square,  the  whole  animus  of  which  was 
against  Franklin  W.  Smith,  and  to  prove  dishonesty  of 

39 


40 


the  firm,  in  short  delivery  of  goods  sold  to  the  depart- 
ment. The  detectives  assumed  that  what  was  known 
to  exist  as  a  practice  elsewhere,  through  collusion  of 
officials,  would  be  also  found  in  Boston. 

The  books  of  these  merchants  tallied  to  an  iota  with 
the  invoices  to  government,  and  such  tracks  against 
Smith  Brothers  were  followed  in  vain. 

But  at  these  inimical  and  despotic  appliances  F.  W. 
Smith  was  alarmed.  He  wrote  to  Messrs.  A.  H.  Rice 
and  D.  W.  Gooch,  representatives  from  Massachusetts, 
and  to  Senator  Wilson,  in  terms  as  follows : 

"Boston,  April  6,  1864. 
''Hon.  A.  H.  Rice, 

"Dear  Sir  :  While  I  was  in  Washington  a  Col.  Olcott 
left  for  Boston  for  investigation  of  frauds  in  the  Navy  De- 
partment. Meanwhile  he  has  held  a  private  court  daily, 
sujnmoning  witnesses  before  him." 


"I  beg  you,  in  behalf  of  a  character  dearer  to  me  than 
life,  once  again  to  ask  of  the  Hon.  Secretary  that  no  step 
shall  be  taken  to  our  injury,  until  I  have  seen  the  state- 
ments that  may  be  gathered  against  us,  and  had  opportu- 
nity to  demonstrate  their  utter,  total  falsity.  Is  this  more 
than  the  justice  I  should  expect  from  the  government  ?  " 


"To  Hon.  D.  W.  Gooch, 

"Dear  Sir  :  I  learn  this  P.M.  that  Col.  Olcott  has  left 
for  Washington  with  his  gathering  of  scandal,  especially 
against  ourselves.  I  beg  you  to  inform  the  delegation  of 
this  wrong. ' '  *         * 

"Answer    I    can,   triumphantly,   if  I  have  opportunity. 


41 


"  But  it  is  useless  to  answer  in  the  dark.  Is  it  possible 
that  with  the  record  I  have  made  to  date,  my  character  is 
to  be  permitted  to  be  outraged  to  gratify  the  malevolence 
of  those  in  power  ?     If  so,  pity  for  a  free  country  !  " 

"To  Hon.  Henry  Wilson,  U.  S.  Senate,  Washington, 

>K  Ht  H^  5}:  >i« 

*'  Dear  Sir  :  Smith  Brothers  invite  the  utmost  scrutiny, 
fairly  conducted. 

' '  Yet  they  have  incurred  the  dislike  of  certain  bureaus. 
The  reasons  will  be  found  in  the  accompanying  pamphlets. 
*  *  My  present  purpose  is  to  elicit  a  perusal  of  the 
enclosed  papers,  that  you  may  read  our  record,  and  to 
bespeak  your  decided  effort  against  any  such  injustice  as 
the  use  of  ex-parte,  secret  evidence  gathered  against  us 
before  we  have  had  any  opportunity  for  a  hearing. ' ' 

To  the  remonstrances  of  these  gentlemen,  Secretary 
Welles  gave  assurance  of  due  fairness.  But  the  inquisi- 
tion continued.  After  the  Secretary  was  informed  that 
Mr.  Smith  had  not  been  summoned,  which  he  had 
claimed  as  a  right,  a  notice  was  sent  to  him  to  appear. 
Thirty  minutes  only  were  allowed  him  in  answer  to 
general  inquiries,  when  he  was  dismissed.  Merchants, 
friends  of  Messrs.  Smith,  who  testified  to  their  integrity, 
were,  like  himself,  never  asked  to  complete  or  sign  their 
testimony  ;  while  threats  and  false  entries  were  employed 
with  workmen  in  the  Navy  Yard,  and  others,  to  work 
up  affidavits  against  them.* 

The  raid  upon  Smith  Brothers  continued,  and  in  in- 
creased  alarm,  F.  W.  Smith  went   to  Washington.      In 


*  See  argument  of  Judge  Thomas  in  defense,  with  quotations  of 
the  sworn  evidence  of  these  witnesses  before  the  Military  Court ; 
also  Addenda  IV,- 


42 


company  with  Hon.  A.  H.  Rice,  he  received  assurance 
from  Secretary  Welles,  *'  that  no  measure  should  be  taken 
against  the  firm  until  opportunity  had  been  given  for 
explanation!' 

Upon  this  pledge  of  the  honor  of  the  Secretary,  Mr. 
Smith  rested  in  confidence  until  its  ruthless  and  absolute 
violation. 

On  the  17th  of  June,  1864,  (anniversary  of  the  battle 
of  Bunker  Hill,  when  the  business  centers  were  deserted), 
three  months  after  the  coming  of  the  inquisition  to  Bos- 
ton, Smith  Brothers  were  arrested  upon  a  military  order 
from  General  Dix  at  New  York,  upon  the  demand  of 
Gideon  Welles,  and  were  sent  to  Fort  Warren. 

Then  a  detachment  of  Marines  took  possession  of 
their  warehouse.  Their  safe  was  forced,  and  all  books 
and  papers  seized.  Soldiers  invaded  the  home  of 
Franklin  W.  Smith,  broke  locks,  and  purloined  all 
papers,  even  correspondence  of  deceased  relatives. 

These  proceedings  aroused  indignation  in  Boston  and 
Washington. 


From  the  ''BOSTON  JOURNAL" 

{Special  Dispatch.) 

* '  There  is  intense  feeling  in  Washington  among  Massa- 
chusetts men  respecting  the  arrest  of  Smith  Brothers,  of 
Boston.  The  Congressional  State  delegation  had  a  meet- 
ing on  the  subject.  They  waited  upon  Secretary  Welles  ; 
but  got  few  promises — none,  in  fact. 

' '  We  understand  that  the  Massachusetts  delegation 
offered  to  be  personally  responsible  for  the  appearance 
of  Messrs.   Smith." 


43 


Editorial  from  the  ''BOSTON  POST,"  June  18th. 

' '  For  some  time  past  a  Select  Committee,  appointed  by 
authorities  at  Washington,  have  been  investigating  matters 
connected  with  navy  contracts  at  this  port,  and  as  a  result 
of  their  investigations,  two  members  of  the  firm  of  Smith 
Brothers,  dealers  in  hardware,  at  No.  102  Federal  street, 
were  arrested  yesterday  by  military  authorities,  their  store 
taken  possession  of,  and  they  sent  to  Fort  Warren. 

"Mr.  Franklin  W.  Smith,  the  senior  member  of  the 
firm,  has  been  in  business  in  this  city  for  many  years,  and 
no  firm  stands  higher  than  his,  in  the  confidence  of  the 
community.  The  transactions  of  Mr.  Smith  with  the  gov- 
ernment commenced  some  three  years  ago,  since  which 
time  his  firm  has  been  almost  exclusively  engaged  in  fur- 
nishing Naval  Supplies  under  contracts.  We  are  informed 
that  the  prices  paid  for  supplies  which  they  have  furnished, 
as  appears  by  official  reports,  have  been  more  favorable  to 
the  government  than  those  paid  at  any  other  yard.  There 
would  seem  to  be  no  chance,  therefore,  for  any  swindle. 

"Some  two  years  ago,  Mr.  Franklin  W.  Smith,  the 
senior  member  of  the  firm,  in  a  series  of  letters  to  the  Navy 
Department,  exposed  the  manner  in  which  the  government 
had  been  grossly  swindled  under  Navy  contracts,  and  rec- 
ommended a  change  in  the  system  of  making  these  con- 
tracts. The  reform  was  made  by  Congress,  upon  his  sug- 
gestion. By  his  fearless  exposure  of  these  abuses,  he 
gained  the  enmity  of  swindling  contractors  and  of  parties 
in  the  Bureau  of  the  Navy  Department,  whose  collusion 
with  these  contractors  was  more  than  suspected.  The  im- 
pression among  the  friends  of  Mr.  Smith  who  know  these 
facts  is,  that  the  proceedings  against  him  are  purely 
malicious. ' ' 

To  paralyze  public  sympathy  by  indications  of  serious 
allegations  against  the  Smiths  when  no  charges  what- 
ever had  been  presented,  as  required  by  law,  bail  to  the 
amount  of  ;^ 500,000  was  demanded.  Immediately  it 
was  telegraphed  that  ^1,000,000  would   be  offered,  and 


44 


within  twenty-four  hours  that  amount  was  tendered  by 
indip^nant  citizens  of  Boston.  When  it  was  seen  that 
the  ruse  to  carry  pubHc  condemnation  by  storm  had 
miscarried  and  recoiled,  it  was  wired  from  the  Navy 
Department  that  a  bond  of  ;^20,ooo  would  suffice.  Upon 
this,  Smith  Brothers  returned  at  once  to  Boston,  after 
most  courteous  and  hospitable  treatment  in  the  fort  by 
Col.  Dimock,  the  commandant.  He  said  that  he  had  no 
precedent  for  detention  of  merchants  in  a  fortress,  and 
therefore  installed  them  in  quarters  adjoining  his  own, 
shared  with  them  his  table,  and  gave  them  the  range  of 
the  fortification  and  island. 

But  while  they  were  quickly  released  through  the 
energy  of  Massachusetts  Congressmen  and  their  fellow 
citizens,  their  books  and  papers  were  sent  to  Philadel- 
phia, where,  as  was  proved,  charges  were  manufactured 
therefrom  to  make  ground  for  an  arrest  which  had  been 
made  without  shadow  of  reason,  and  in  utter  violation 
of  the  "  Rules  and  Regulations "  provided  for  military 
arrests,  above  quoted. 

It  was  not  until  the  i  ith  of  August,  1864,  two  months 
later,  that  "  charges  and  specifications  "  were  addressed 
to  F.  W.  Smith  at  the  department. 

These  charges  did  not  involve  a  loss  of  above  ;^  5 00  in 
the  aggregate  on  four  different  specifications.  Subse- 
quently another  allegation  of  ;^2,ooo  damage  upon  a  sale 
of  pig  iron  (on  which  the  government  made  a  saving  of 
;^ 30,000  in  value  before  delivery),  was  added;  but  this 
count  was  at  once  abandoned  by  the  court. 

In  the  report  of  the  Committee  of  the  Boston  Board 


45 

of  Trade  in  review  of  the  case  occurs  the  following  sum- 
mary of  these  charges : 

"  In  a  word,  your  committee  do  not  hesitate  to  express 
the  opinion  that  a7i  wiporter  of  the  different  ki?ids  of  tin,  a 
dealer  i?i  foreign  and  domestic  iron,  and  an  irnporter  of 
hardware,  acting  as  referees,  for  a  trifli^ig  fee,  would  have 
heard  the  case  in  teyi  or  twelve  hours,  and  have  made  an 
award  satisfactory  to  the  most  respectable  co?nmercial  houses 
in  the  United  States  ajid  iii  Europe. 

"The  transactions  of  Smith  Brothers  &  Co.,  with  the 
Navy  Department  amounted  to  about  a  million  and  a 
quarter  of  dollars  ;  and  so  numerous  were  the  articles 
delivered  that  the  entries  of  sales  cover  twelve  hundred  and 
five  pages.  We  give  a  single  instance  of  details.  In  a 
contract  for  the  precise  sum  of  $19,902.13,  a  ivitness  for 
the  prosecutio7i  estimated  thus  : 

"  251  articles  upon  different  lines.  80,000  tacks  and  brads. 

12,564  single  articles.  6  sets  of  carpenter's  tools. 

171  barrels.  600  feet  of  chain. 

53,509  pounds  of  articles  asst'd.  52  reams  of  paper. 

12,000  tallies.  I  10  boxes  of  tin. 

250  gross  assorted.  j  64  iron  girders. 

"Of  these,  alleged  to  be  of  inferior  quality  at  the  trial, 
were,  i  mason's  hammer,  i  rachet  drill,  i  pair  dividers,  i 
spirit  level,  2  pickaxes,  i  drawing  knife,  i  drill  stock,  i 
dozen  chisels,  i  sheet  sand  paper,  i  sickle,  i  hoe,  2 
shovels,  I  axe,  i  handsaw,  i  hammer,  5  manure  forks,  i 
spade,   6  scythes  and  6  rakes. 

"In  view  of  such  facts,  the  charge  of  'fraud,'  or  of 
fraudulent  intention,  is  utterly  frivolous.  The  wonder, 
indeed,  is  that,  in  so  large  a  business,  and  in  the  condition 
of  the  market  since  the  beginning  of  the  war,  the  number 
of  articles  below  the  standard  quality  should  be  so  very 
limited.  Of  the  general  good  quality  of  the  goods  and 
wares  sold  and  delivered,  there  can  be  no  doubt.  No  less 
than  ninety  merchants  and  manufacttirers,  who  sold  goods  to 


46 


Smith  Brothers  &  Co. ,  to  the  amount  nearly  of  one  million 
of  dollars,  declare,  in  a  paper  which  was  transmitted  to  the 
late  deeply  lamented  Presidejit  of  the  United  States,  that  hav- 
ing furnished  that  firm  '  with  merchandise  at  various  tirnes 
within  the  past  three  years,  desti7iedfor  the  use  of  the  United 
States  Navy  Depart7nent,  we  hereby  certify  that  we  have  in 
all  cases  sold  and  delivered  to  them  such  qualities  as  we 
believed  would  be  entirely  satisfactory  to  and  fitted  for  the 
use  of  the  Departme?it,  a7id  such  as  we  should  have  supplied 
had  the  order  been  made  upoji  us  directly  by  the  Gover7i7nent. ' 

"Frauds,  cheatings,  should  show  great  gains.  But 
your  committee  are  satisfied,  that  this  large,  complicated 
and  vexatious  business  was  transacted  for  a  very  moderate 
compensation.  In  the  course  of  the  trial,  '  Mr.  B.  G. 
Smith  testified  that,  upon  as  an  exact  approximation  as  he 
had  been  able  to  make,  the  net  profits  left  to  Smith  Brothers 
&  Co.,  on  the  first  of  February,  1864,  were  about  five  per 
cent,  upon  the  amount  of  sales.' 

**  Few  merchants  of  reputation,  as  we  venture  to  suggest, 
will  be  anxious  hereafter  to  become  '  contractors, '  for  twice 
or  thrice  five  per  cent,  profit,  when,  besides  the  notorious 
delays  in  payment,  fines  and  Bastiles  are  in  the  prospective, 
for  alleged  default  in  the  quality  of  a  saw  or  of  a  hammer  ; 
or  because,  owing  to  the  operation  of  the  tariff  on  importa- 
tions fro7}i  Europe  of  articles  produced  east  of  the  Cape  of 
Good  Hope,  there  is  a  difference  of  two  cents  the  pound  in 
tins  of  about  the  same  purity,  and  of  the  same  intrinsic 
value  ;  ay,  because  Banca,  not  Revely,  is  '  nominated  in 
the  bond.'  " 

Accompanying  the  charges  and  specifications  was  an 
order  to  appear  before  a  court-martial  at  Philadelphia. 
Then  a  delegation  went  to  President  Lincoln  in  remon- 
strance. 

This  delegation  comprised  Senator  Wilson  of  Massa- 
chusetts, Judge  Thomas,  and  the  late  Hon.  Wm.  B. 
Spooner,  one  of  the  most  eminent  and  philanthropic 
citizens  of  Boston.     When  Senator  Wilson  opened  the 


47 


case,  President  Lincoln  replied  :  "  I  know  all  about  it, 
Wilson  ;  it  is  a  fight  between  a  department  and  a  citizen, 
and  the  citizen  has  no  fair  show.  I  propose  to  quash 
the  whole  thing."  "  No,"  said  the  Senator,  ''  we  hope 
you  will  do  no  such  thing.  Smith  Brothers  wish  it 
never  to  be  said  that  this  charge  was  fixed  up  through 
influence.  They  challenge  the  fight,  but  want  protec- 
tion against  conspiracy  and  a  court  chosen  by  their 
enemies." 

*'  You  are  right,"  said  the  President,  "  go  tell  the 
Smiths  I'd  as  leave  be  tried  by  the  devil  on  a  court- 
martial,  as  anybody  else,  if  it  can  be  looked  up  after- 
wards. Let  them  run  their  machine,  and  I  will  take  it 
up  when  they  are  done." 

Despite  the  countermand,  a  second  order  was  issued 
for  the  defendants  to  go  to  the  court  in  Philadelphia. 
The  delegation  returned  to  the  President,  who  sent  for 
Secretary  Welles  and  asked  the  reason.  "  We  have  no 
money,"  said  he,  "  to  pay  expenses  of  sending  the  court 
to  Boston."  "  I  guess  you  can  find  some,"  said  the 
President.  "  Order  the  court  to  Boston!'  The  trial  sub- 
sequently cost  Smith  Brothers  twenty  thousand  dollars, 
and  much  more  to  the  government. 

At  length,  in  September,  1864,  the  Naval  Court  con- 
vened in  the  Navy  Yard  at  Boston.  It  was  composed 
of  seven  naval  officers,  retired  for  old  age  or  in- 
competency on  "half  pay;"  some  of  whom  were  noted 
on  the  Naval  Register  as  "  not  recommended  for  promo- 
tion." These  absolute  judges  of  both  law  and  fact  were 
chosen  by  the  accusers,  one  of  whom  had  been  heard  to 


48 


say,  "  We  constitute  courts  to  convict!''^  So  long  as  their 
decisions  suited  the  appointing  power  these  superan- 
nuated officers  received  "  full  pay."  If  not  satisfactory, 
they  could  be  **  relieved." 

Each  page  of  testimony  recorded  in  mammoth  pen- 
manship paid  the  Judge  Advocate  a  fee.  It  was  piled 
up  to  an  aggregate  of  2,500  pages.  Two  judges  advo- 
cate appeared  before  the  close  of  the  case.  Four  months 
were  spent  before  the  conclusion  of  the  case  by  the  court. 
On  the  26th  of  January,  1865,  the  President  ordered  the 
record  to  be  sent  to  him  for  examination  and  revision 
by  counsel  for  the  department,  by  whom  all  charges  had 
been  abandoned  but  that  of  ;^ioo,  for  a  difference  be- 
tween Banca  and  Revely  tin. 

On  the  evening  of  March  13th,  the  President  said  to 
Mr.  Sumner :  *'  I  have  read  every  word  of  the  opinion 
of  Eames,  but  by  his  own  showing,  only  one  case  was 
in  any  way  made  out — that  of  the  Banca  tin.  I  wish, 
Sumner,  you  would  take  Eames'  opinion  and  let  me 
know  what  you  think  of  it." 

The  sequel  of  the  case  is  appended  from  Mr.  Sumner's 

pen. 

. . > , . 

*  This  was  the  origin  of  a  now  common  quotation. 


EXTRACTS   FROM  THE  OPINION   OF 

HON.    CHARLES    SUJMNER 

GIVEN  AT  REQUEST   OF 

PRESIDENT  LINCOLN  FOR  HIS  REVIEW  OF  THE  CASE. 


This  paper  with  explanatory  notes*  was  prepared  by 
Mr.  Sumner  for  the  ninth  volumes  of  his  **  Works,"  the 
month  before  his  death.  He  preceded  it  by  the  *'  Ap- 
peal of  the  Massachusetts  Delegation  in  Congress  to  the 
President  of  the  United  States,"  written  by  himself. 
Vide  Addenda  No.  I. 


' '  The  more  I  have  examined  this  case,  the  more  I  have 
been  surprised  by  the  preliminary  proceedings,  the  con- 
tinued prosecution,  and  the  findings  of  the  court.  I  can 
well  understand  how  they  were  used  in  the  House  of  Rep- 
resentatives as  an  argument  for  the  total  repeal  of  the  Act 
of  Congress  authorizing  the  trial  of  civilians  by  courts- 
martial.  Such  a  case  must  make  us  fear  that,  under  this 
Act,  justice  may  be  sacrificed.  It  might  make  honest 
merchants  hesitate  to  enter  into  business  relations  with  the 
government. 

"  On  careful  examination,  it  seems  that  the  whole  prose- 
cution, so  far  as  proof  is  seriously  pretended,  is  reduced  to 
one  single  specification — to  wit,  the  sale  and  delivery  of 


*  Senator  Sumner  presented  to  Mr.  F.  W.  Smith  all  his  manu- 
scripts upon  the  case.  They  are  valuable  autographic  souvenirs 
of  that  indefatigable  consecration  to  justice,  which  was  the  noble 
characteristic  of  his  life. 

49 


50 


five  thousand  pounds  of  a  tin  called  Revely,  instead  of  a  tin 
called  Banca,  by  which,  at  most,  the  government  lost  one 
hundred  dollars." 


"  Look  at  this  carefully,  and  the  wonder   increases  that 
these  proceedings  were  ever  instituted. 

* '  I .  The  first  remark  to  make  is,  that,  even  according  to 
the  finding  of  the  court,  the  government  has  suffered  only  to 
the  amount  of  one  hundred  dollars — being  the  difference  in 
price  between  the  two  kinds  of  tin  at  the  date  of  delivery. 
The  pettiness  of  this  loss  is  still  more  apparent  when  it  is 
considered  that  the  transactions  of  the  respondents  with 
the  government  reached  the  sum  of  more  than  twelve  hun- 
dred thousand  dollars,  having  such  infinite  details  that  they 
covered  twelve  hundred  and  five  pages  of  sales.  Surely,  on 
every  principle  of  reason  or  evidence,  the  insignificance  of 
this  loss,  in  transactions  on  so  large  a  scale,  and  extending 
over  three  years  of  time,  constitutes  an  unanswerable  pre- 
sumption in  favor  of  the  respondents,  excluding,  as  it  does, 
any  adaquate  motive  for  the  perpetration  of  fraud.  *  * 
If  a  mountain  in  labor  ever  brought  forth  a  mouse,  it  is  this 
mountainous  prosecution,  whose  only  offspring  yet  crawling 
on  earth  is  ayi  allegation  of  loss  to  the  Uiiited  States  of  one 
hund^^ed  dollars  !  But,  if  we  look  further  at  this  tra?isac- 
tio7i,  it  will  be  seen  that  it  is  absolutely  unimpeachable. 

"  It  appears  that,  according  to  extensive  and  long  con- 
tinued usage,  Revely  is  included  under  Banca  ;  that, 
according  to  usage  at  the  navy  yard,  it  was  treated  as 
Banca  ;  that  the  whole  transaction  and  the  delivery  were 
open  and  without  any  concealment ;  that  Revely  was  actually 
accepted  by  the  officers  of  the  government  in  performance 
of  the  contract  ;  that  the  respondents  never  expected  to 
supply  other  than  Revely  ;  and  lastly,  that  the  prices  paid 
shows  that  Revely  was  intended.  Surely  this  is  enough. 
I  forbear  to  go  into  the  evidence  of  founders  and  plumbers, 
derived  from  experience  ;  of  assayers  and  chemists,  derived 
from  analysis  of  the  two  tins  in  question  ;  and  also  of  busi- 
ness men  as  to  their  comparative  value,  for  all  this  is  supur- 
fluous.  To  charge  fraud  against  the  respondents  imder  such 
circtimstances  is  crjiel,  irratio?ial,  preposterous.      Their  con- 


51 


duct  cannot  be  tortured  or  tioisted  into  fraud.  As  well 
undertake  to  extract  su7ibeams  out  of  cucujnbers,  or  oil  out  of 
Massachusetts  granite. 

"  It  is  difficult  to  imagine  the  origin  of  these  unfortunate 
proceedings,  which,  beginning  in  unexampled  harshness, 
threaten  to  end  in  unexampled  injustice,  unless  arrested  by 
the  President.  But  there  are  certain  facts  which  may  shed 
light  upon  some  of  the  hidden  springs." 

;)<  :^  ^  Jjs  if. 

'*  It  appears  that  Franklin  W.  Smith,  one  of  the  respond- 
ents, published  a  pamphlet,  in  which  he  exposed  abuses  in 
the  contract  system  in  the  Navy  Department,  and  it  is 
understood  that  sundry  officials  felt  aggrieved  by  these  dis- 
closures. The  spirit  of  these  officials  appears  sufficiently 
in  the  following  extract  from  a  letter  of  one  of  the  witnesses 
of  the  government,  holding  an  important  position  in  the 
Navy  Department,  addressed  to  another  witness,  himself 
an  official  also  : 

" '  /  have  been  summoned  before  the  Select  Committee  of  the  Senate 
for  investigating  frauds  in  naval  supplies,  and  IF  THE  WOOL  DON'T  FLY 
IT  WON'T  BE  MY  FAULT  Norton,  the  Navy  Agent,  has  complained  that 
I  have  interfered  with  his  business  ;  he  and  his  friend  Smith  are  DEAD 
COCKS  IN  THE  PIT.  WE  HAVE  GOT  A  SURE  THING  ON  THEM  IN  THE 
TIN  BUSINESS.     They  that  dance  must  pay  the  fiddler. ' 

*  *  The  writer  of  this  letter,  after  appearing  before  the 
Senate  Committee  at  a  later  day,  came  on  from  Washing- 
ton to  appear  before  the  court-martial  at  Charlestown  as  a 
witness  against  the  respondent,  where  he  underwent  a 
cross-examination  on  which  I  forbear  to  comment.  If  the 
prosecution  did  not  originate  in  the  spirit  which  fills  his 
letter,  it  is  evident  that  this  spirit  entered  into  it.  *IF  THE 
WOOL  DON'T  FLY  IT  WON'T  BE  MY  FAULT'  'DEAD 
COCKS  IN  THE  PIT'  ^A  SURE  THING  IN  THE  TIN 
BUSINESS.'  Such  are  the  countersigns  adopted  by  the 
agent  of  this  dark  proceeding,  showing  clearly  two  things  : 
first,  the  foregone  conclusion  that  these  respondents  were 
to  be  sacrificed  ;  and,  secondly,  that  the  case  turned  on  the 
'  tin  business. ' 


52 


"It  is  hard  that  citizens  enjoying  a  good  name,  who  had 
the  misfortune  to  come  into  business  relations  with  the 
government,  should  be  exposed  to  such  a  spirit ; 

^  ^  ^  ^  ^ 

that  they  should  be  obliged  to  undergo  a  protracted  trial 
by  court-martial,  damaging  their  good  name,  destroying 
their  peace,  breaking  up  their  business,  and  subjecting 
them  to  untold  expense,  w/ien  at  the  slightest  touch  the 
whole  case  vanishes  into  thin  air,  leavirig  behind  nothing  bid 
the  incomprehensible  spirit  in  ivhich  it  had  its  origin. 

"  Of  course  the  finding  and  sentence  of  the  court  ought, 
without  delay,  to  be  set  aside.  But  this  is  only  the  begin- 
ning of  justice.  Some  positive  reparation  should  be  made 
CO  citizens  who  have  been  so  deeply  injured. 

''Charles  Sumner. 
"Washington,  March  i6,  1865. 

"  To  the  President  of  the  United  States.'' 


Interesting  Incidents  of  PRESIDENT  LINCOLN'S  Action  Ap 
pended  to  the  Opinion  by  MR.  SUMNER  for  his  Works. 

"The  President  promptly  overruled  the  judgment  and 
sentence.  The  result  was  received  with  manifestations  of 
joy.  The  defendants,  whose  cruel  prosecution  had  been 
protracted  for  six  months,  had  an  ovation  in  the  congratula- 
tion of  their  friends  and  fellow-citizens.  ^^  Strangers  at  a 
distance,  feeling  that  public  liberty  had  suffered  through 
them,  sent  their  sympathy.  The  press  gave  expression  to 
the  prevailing  sentiment.  Nor  was  Mr  Sumner  for  ^otten. 
The  defendants  made  haste  by  telegraph  to  say  :  '  Accept 
the  lasting  gratitude  of  Smith  Brothers,  their  families,  and 
their  many  friends. '  Others  wrote  in  the  same  spirit — as, 
for  instance,  J.  C.  Hoadley,  of  New  Bedford,  who,  though 
not  knowing  the  sufferers,  said  :  '  I  thank  you,  in  the 
name  of  all  fair  deahng,  for  your  opinion  upon  the  case  of 
Franklin  W.  Smith.'      From  these  expressions  it  appears 


Addenda  VIII. 


CL-s^  &cX.-y/Xy,         A-I^^^Z^        ^^^.^^tL^'     ^<1a.^ 


that  the  eftbrt  of  Mr.  Sumner  was  regarded  as  not  only  a 
defense  of  the  individual  citizen,  but  a  contribution  to  good 
government. 

"  Independent  of  its  character,  this  case  has  an  incidental 
interest.  It  was  one  of  the  last,  if  not  the  last,  having  a 
personal  relation,  that  ever  occupied  the  mind  of  President 
Lincoln.  His  indorsement,  overruling  the  judgment  and 
sentence,  bears  date  March  i8th.  This  was  Saturday. 
Meanwhile  the  Rebellion  was  about  to  fall,  and  the  Presi- 
dent left  Washington,  by  boat,  Thursday,  March  23d,  for 
City  Point,  the  headquarters  of  the  Army  of  Virginia, 
where  he  remained  till  after  the  surrender  of  Richmond, 
returning  to  Washington  Sunday  evening,  April  9th,  and 
being  assassinated  Friday  evening,  April  14th. 

"  Some  circumstances  associated  with  this  case  help  ex- 
hibit the  character  of  the  President.  They  will  be  stated 
briefly.  As  soon  as  Mr.  Sumner  had  prepared  his  Opinion, 
he  hurried  to  the  President.  It  was  late  in  the  afternoon, 
and  the  latter  was  about  entering  his  carriage  for  a  drive, 
when  Mr.  Sumner  arrived  with  the  papers  in  his  hand.  He 
at  once  mentioned  the  result  he  had  reached,  and  added 
that  it  was  a  case  for  instant  action.  The  President  pro- 
posed that  he  should  return  the  next  day,  when  he  would 
consider  it  wath  him.  Mr.  Sumner  rejoined,  that,  in  his 
opinion,  the  President  ought  not  to  sleep  on  the  case — that 
he  should  interfere  promptly  for  the  relief  of  innocent  fellow 
citizens — and  urged  that,  if  Abraham  Lincoln  had  suffered 
unjust  imprisonment,  an  immense  bill  of  expense,  a  trial  by 
court-martial,  and  an  unjust  condemnation,  he  would  cry 
out  against  any  postponement  of  justice  for  a  single  day. 
The  President,  apparently  impressed  by  Mr.  Sumner's 
earnestness  and  his  personal  appeal,  appointed  eleven 
o'clock  that  evening,  when  he  would  go  over  the  case,  and 
hear  Mr.  Summer's  Opinion. 

* '  Accordingly,  at  eleven  o'  clock  that  evening,  in  the 
midst  of  a  thunder-storm,  filling  the  streets  with  water, 
and  threatening  chimneys,  Mr.  Sumner  made  his  way  to 
the  Presidential  mansion.  At  the  very  hour  named  he  was 
received,  and  at  the  request  of  the  President  proceeded  to 
read    his    Opinion.     The   latter   listened  attentively,   with 


56 


occasional  comments,  and  at  the  close  showed  his  sympathy 
with  the  respondents.  It  was  now  twenty  minutes  after  mid- 
night, when  the  President  said  that  he  would  write  his  con- 
clusion at  once,  and  that  Mr.  Sumner  must  come  and  hear 
it  the  next  morning — "when  I  open  shop,"  said  he.  ''And 
when  do  you  open  shop?"  Mr.  Sumner  inquired.  "At 
nine  o'clock,"  was  the  reply.  At  that  hour  Mr.  Sumner 
was  in  the  office  he  had  left  after  midnight,  when  the  Presi- 
dent came  running  in,  and  read  at  once  the  indorsement  in 
his  own  handwriting,  as  follows  : 

THE    VINDICATION    BY    PRESIDENT    LINCOLN. 

"/  am  unwilling  for  ihe  sentence  to  stand  and  be  executed,  to  any 
extent,  in  this  case.  In  the  absence  of  a  more  adequate  motive  than  the 
evidence  discloses,  I  am  wholly  unable  to  believe  in  the  existence  of 
criminal  or  fraudulent  intent  on  the  part  of  one  of  such  well-established 
good  character  as  is  the  accused.  If  the  evidence  went  as  far  toward 
establishing  a  guilty  profit  of  one  or  two  hundred  thousand  dollars,  as  it 
does  of  one  or  two  hundred  dollars,  the  case  would,  on  the  question  of 
guilt,  bear  a  far  different  aspect.  That  on  this  contract,  involving  from 
one  million  to  twelve  hundred  thousand  dollars,  the  contractors  should 
attempt  a  fraud  which  at  the  most  could  profit  them  only  one  or  two 
hundred,  or  even  one  thousand  dollars,  is  to  my  mind  beyond  the  power 
of  rational  belief.  That  they  did  not,  in  such  a  case,  strike  for  greater 
gains  proves  that  they  did  not,  with  guilty  or  fraudulent  intent,  strike  at 
all.  The  judgment  and  sentence  are  disapproved  and  declared  null,  and 
the  accused  ordered  to  be  discharged. 

"A.  LINCOLN. 
"March  IS,  1865." 


Reduced  Photograph  of  the  Endorsement  of  President  Lincoln 


<^/m/ 


u^i^j^^x^c^c^  x^^  ^i^&y  c-^>^JiXju*  jti  /Uj£:i»^ 


<t-«*o. 


^y^^->~0      ^?>^    /u^     yl^^^Ov^a^-.^.,^*/   oC<r^e^e<>'\^     /^^^^  Qai,-3i^ KrTfxX^ 

^^w^^.^.-t-'Crr    iJA<uz^C~ r^  /t^5^  <s<?-o(feiC^^   Aw*o-^'»^  j^^n^^r^-^ 

y,.^    /-^^1>     O^N-^rvV"  CVifV-^--*'  Z^'^^'lf^   ACt-.^^    ^^»^   i:r>w  /X/  ^^^^3*^1*^. 

/Lr,^  1^-^::^  t^j  (>^-^  /v^A^-v^i:^  ^p--^.  ^^^<— ^ 


PUBLIC    DOCUMENTS   AND   THE   PRESS 

1864=1865. 


From  the  Speech  of  HON.  JOHN  P.  HALE  in  the  United  States 
Senate,  Febi^uary,  1865. 

' '  There  was  a  committee  appointed  by  the  Senate  at  the 
last  session  to  investigate  matters  connected  with  naval 
supplies.  The  committee  attended  to  that  duty  very 
laboriously  ;  and  they  laid  some  results  before  the  Senate 
and  before  the  country  which,  I  think,  were  most  conclu- 
sive as  to  the  existence  of  gross  fraud.  Well,  sir,  do  you 
knov/  what  the  result  of  that  was  ?  One  of  the  material 
witnesses  in  that  case — one  of  the  most  respectable  men  of 
Boston,  who  testified,  and  testified  very  fully,  before  that 
committee — pretty  soon  after  he  went  home,  was  seized, 
his  store  seized,  his  papers  seized,  his  wife's  papers  seized  ; 
and  he  was  sent  to  a  military  fort,  and  ordered  not  to  be 
released  under  a  bail  of  $500,000,  and  was  ordered  to 
Philadelphia  for  trial.  That  was  a  little  too  strong  even 
for  the  city  of  Boston,  considering  that,  to  render  the  thing 
more  notorious,  the  arrest  was  made  on  the  17th  of  June." 


In  reply  to  the  question  of  Senator  Davis,  who  asked  : 
"If  the  offense  for  which  that  gentleman  was  seized  and 
imprisoned  was  merely  that  of  giving  in  his  testimony  and 
his  exposure  of  those  frauds."     Mr.  Hale  declared  : 

' '  That  is  my  opinion  ;  but  it  was  not  the  assigned  cause. 
They  ordered  him,  as  I  have  said,  to  be  confined  in  Fort 
Warren,  and  not  to  be  released  under  $500,000  bail ;  and 
he  was  ordered  to  Philadelphia  for  trial.  This  was  a  little 
too  much  for  the  loyal  city  of  Boston  ;  and  it  created  such 
indignation  there  that  a  delegation  of  citizens  of  Massachu- 

59 


60 


setts — I  think  the  honorable  Senator  on  my  left  (Mr. 
Sumner),  was  one  of  them — represented  this  thing  to  the 
President ;  and  the  President  countermanded  the  order  for 
carrying  a  citizen  of  Massachusetts  from  Boston  to  Phila- 
delphia for  trial." 


Speaking  of  courts-martial,  Mr.  Hale  said,  in  the  Senate  : 
"  And  in  that  connection,  I  have  a  remarkable  statement  to 
make  in  regard  to  these  tribunals.  The  man  who  ordered 
this  outrageous  arrest — the  man  who  perpetrated  this  out- 
rage in  Boston — compared  to  which  the  proceedings  of 
Turkey  are  civilized,  and  the  Inquisition  is  a  tender  mercy 
— being  remonstrated  with,  on  another  occasion,  against 
sending  these  cases  to  naval  and  military  courts-martial, 
and  being  asked  why  he  did  not  take  the  ordinary  courts, 
made  this  remarkable  avowal  :  '  Your  civil  courts  are 
orgmiized  to  acquit;  we  organize  courts  toco7ivict!^  If 
there  was  some  friend  of  the  individual  referred  to  here  to 
deny  it,  without  stirring  out  of  my  tracks,  I  would  prove, 
by  evidence  that  would  flash  conviction  on  every  mind  that 
heard  it,  that  it  is  true  as  Holy  Writ  that  this  declaration 
was  made,  and  not  only  made,  but  acted  upon." 


Speech  of  HON.  H.  L  DA  IVES,  March  14,  1865. 

' '  I  understand  from  high  authority  in  the  Navy  Depart- 
ment, that  courts-martial  are  not  organized,  like  courts  of 
law,  to  guard  the  rights  of  the  accused  and  secure  justice, 
but  are  organized  to  convict." 


Still  again,  and  referring  to  this  very  case  :  "I  have  in 
the  last  fortnight  had  the  painful  duty  devolved  upon  me 
to  read  the  proceedings  of  a  court-martial  under  the  law 
which  I  reported  to  the  House  some  two  years  ago.  It  is 
one  which,  I  venture  to  say,  has  hardly  a  parallel  for  the 
bitter  malignity  which  seems  to  run  through  the  whole  pro- 
ceedings, and  for  wider  departure  from  old  and  established 


61 


rules  of  law,  of  which  the  accused  were  the  victims,  and  by 
which  they  were  hunted,  since  the  days  of  Jeffreys.  It  is 
the  case  of  Smith  Brothers  of  Boston.  If  every  charge 
alleged  before  the  court-martial  were  taken  to  be  true,  just 
as  alleged,  they  would  only  have  been  in  default,  in  tran- 
sactions covering  a  business  of  more  than  twelve  hundred 
thousand  dollars,  and  the  furnishing  of  thousands  of  differ- 
ent articles,  barely  twenty-two  hundred  dollars,  and  with- 
out anything  which  deserves  the  name  of  evidence  that  this 
paltry  default  was  intentional. ' ' 


Editorial  from  the  "BOSTON  JOURNAL/'  February  14,  1865. 

' '  The  case  of  the  Smith  Brothers,  which  has  been  on 
trial  before  a  court-martial  for  several  months  past,  is  one 
which  will  now  demand  the  attention  and  examination  of 
the  public,  and  probably  of  the  President  and  Congress. 
We  doubt  whether  in  the  course  of  the  war,  individuals — 
citizens  whose  loyalty  is  unimpeached — have  been  more 
harshly  dealt  with,  or  more  persistently  and  cruelly  perse- 
cuted. All  the  constitutional  and  legal  safe-guards  which, 
under  our  Repubhcan  government,  have  been  thrown  around 
individual  liberty,  have  in  their  case  been  broken  down, 
and  under  no  despotic  government  have  those  who  have 
fallen  under  the  ban  of  the  ruling  powers  been  more  sum- 
marily dealt  with,  or  held  in  a  grasp  of  more  relentless 
severity." 


' '  The  public  will  naturally  inquire  how  and  in  what 
quarter  this  persecution  originated  ?  Two  years  ago 
Franklin  W.  Smith  exposed  and  broke  up  an  existing  con- 
tract system  which  opened  a  wide  door  for  frauds.  In  his 
illustrations  of  the  working  of  the  system  it  was  shown  that 
some  of  those  employed  in  the  bureaus  of  the  Navy  De- 
partment must  have  been  in  collusion  with  swindling  con- 
tractors. From  that  time  the  persecution  commenced. 
Investigation,  which  this  case  will  certainly  receive,  will 
develop  its  source  and  extent." 


62 


Editorial  from  "BOSTON  DAILY  ADVERTISER," 
March  21,  1865. 

"The  result  of  the  great  case  of  the  Smith  Brothers, 
naval  contractors,  charged  with  fraud,  is  at  last  before  the 
public.  After  preliminary  proceedings,  which  had  seemed 
to  point  to  disclosures  of  astounding  magnitude,  and  after 
a  thorough  investigation  of  the  business  of  the  defendants, 
whose  books  and  private  papers  were  searched  by  experts 
for  the  materials  for  a  prosecution,  the  charges  brought 
against  them  finally  settled  down  to  an  amount  not  much 
exceeding  $2,000,  while  the  charges  relied  upon  against 
them  scarcely  reached  the  sum  of  $500."  ^^  *  "The 
President  has  reviewed  the  case  and  has  annulled  the  judg- 
ment, thus  setting  his  condemnation  not  only  upon  this 
extraordinary  sentence,  but  upon  the  judgment  itself,  by 
which,  after  their  case  had  so  shrunk  from  its  original  sup- 
posed dimensions,  the  accused  were  convicted  at  all.  The 
upshot  of  the  matter  is,  that  after  all  the  immense  parade 
and  excitement  with  which  this  case  began,  it  hums  out  that 
there  is  nothing  in  it.  The  accused  stand  to-day  not  only 
free  from  all  charges,  but  with  evidence  that  after  a  search- 
ing examination  of  their  course  of  business,  no  sound  basis 
for  charges  could  be  found.  They  had,  at  the  beginning, 
the  confidence  of  the  mercantile  community  in  which  their 
lives  have  been  passed  ;  they  now  have  its  indignant  sym- 
pathy also. ' ' 

"The  arrest  of  the  Smith  Brothers  was, made  in  June, 
1864.  It  was  marked  by  every  circumstance  that  could 
suggest  the  blackest  criminality  on  their  part.  Had  they 
been  guilty  of  treason,  the  proceeding  would  have  been 
deemed  severe  ;  it  would  have  been  thought  unreasonable 
and  even  outrageous,  had  the  charge  been  murder. "  *  * 
' '  And  all  this,  as  now  only  too  certainly  appears,  was  done 
upon  a  venture.  Those  instigating  and  responsible  for  the 
proceedings,  may  have  thought  it  likely  that  something  of 
importance  might  thus  be  discovered,  but  they  plainly  had 
nothing  of  consequence  to  base  their  action  upon.  Every 
constitutional  safeguard  of  personal  rights — freedom  from 
unreasonable  searches  and  seizures  and  from  excessive  bail 


63 

— was  disregarded,  not  from  any  necessity,  but  to  see  what 
might  come  of  it,  and  what  disclosures  might  result  from  a 
blow  thus  struck  at  random.  The  whole  unlimited  authority 
with  which  the  people  have  temporarily  intrusted  their  gov- 
ernment to  meet  the  terrible  exigencies  of  civil  war  was  put 
forth,  and  all,  not  only  without  necessity,  but  as  it  appears 
upon  grounds  which  would  not  justify  detention  over  night. 

"  Upon  these  proceedings  followed  a  tedious  and  costly 
trial,  the  amount  involved  in  which  would  not  pay  for  the 
printing  necessarily  done  by  the  accused  ;  ten  times  the 
amount  would  not  reimburse  either  government  or  accused 
for  their  expenses.  And  now  upon  a  review  of  the  case  by 
a  senator,  whose  pains-taking  and  love  of  justice  displayed 
in  this  case  do  him  the  highest  honor,  and  by  the  President, 
who  will  see  the  rebellion  crushed  but  not  innocent  citizens, 
the  case  has  been  upset,  and  the  accused  have  escaped 
from  the  tremendous  blow  which  was  aimed  at  them.  With 
less  individual  tenacity  of  purpose,  less  ample  means  at 
command  and  fewer  friends,  they  could  not  have  escaped, 
the  whole  power  and  authority  of  the  United  States  being 
used  against  them — and  what  would  then  have  been  the 
record  ?  Two  citizens  destroyed,  in  fame  and  property,  and 
— as  the  President  has  now  decided — without  just  cause  ! 

'*  We  will  now  seek  to  probe  the  motives  of  these  pro- 
ceedings. Their  history  runs  back,  we  suspect,  for  a  con- 
siderable distance  among  controversies  as  to  Bureau  man- 
agement— respecting  which  we  had  occasion  to  give  an 
opinion  favorable  to  the  Messrs.  Smith  in  June  of  last  year, 
shortly  before  their  arrest,  when  they  were  already  labor- 
ing under  accusations,  which,  upon  examination  we  pro- 
nounced to  be  unfounded.  All  this  history,  there  is  reason 
to  believe,  will  engage  the  attention  of  Congress  and  will 
be  thoroughly  explored."  *  *  ''  Unhappily  we  cannot 
wipe  out  the  shameful  record  of  a  transaction  like  this,  in 
which,  at  last,  the  government  is  found  to  become  the  chief 
offender  from  whom  reparation  is  due.  But  the  President 
can,  and  if  he  heeds  the  unanimous  voice  of  public  opinion, 
he  will  see  to  it  that  his  subordinates  are  made  to  under- 
stand that  their  powers  are  not  to  be  used  wantonly,  and 
that  the  civil  rights  and  reputations  of  citizens  are  not  to  be 
struck  down  heedlessly  and  upon  mere  suspicion," 


64 


Editorial  from  the  ^'BOSTON  JOURNAL,"  March  22,  1865. 

Senator    Sumner's    Review    of   the    Case    of    the 
Smith  Brothers. 

* '  We  publish  in  the  Supplement  of  this  morning  the  able 
review,  by  Senator  Sumner,  of  the  case  of  Franklin  W. 
Smith,  which  should  be  read  by  all  who  are  interested  in 
this  extraordinary  case.  It  will  be  seen  by  this  paper  that 
the  case,  when  it  left  the  Navy  Department  and  was  sub- 
mitted to  the  President,  had  little  left  but  the  tin  charge. 
The  Court  swept  away  some  of  the  charges,  and  the  Solici- 
tor of  the  Navy  Department,  Mr.  Eames,  conceded  that 
there  was  little  or  no  basis  for  the  others,  except  the  tin 
charge.  On  that  the  prosecution  fell  back,  and  intrenched 
itself 

"This  tin  charge — this  enormous  crime  for  which  two 
honorable  merchants  were  summarily  arrested,  without  any 
of  the  forms  of  civil  law,  their  business  broken  up,  and  a 
large  portion  of  their  property  swept  away — involves  the 
petty  sum  of  $ioo  !  But  even  this  charge  is  completely 
riddled  by  Mr.  Sum  ner  in  his  review,  as  it  was  effectually 
answered  on  the  trial  even  by  the  testimony  for  the  Gov- 
ernment, a  part  of  which  Mr.  Sumner  quotes.  As  Mr. 
Sumner  pointedly  remarks  :  '  At  the  slightest  touch  the 
whole  case  vanished  into  thin  air,  leaving  nothing  behind 
but  the  incomprehensible  spirit  in  which  it  had  its  origin.'  " 


Editorial,  "NEW  YORK  COMMERCIAL  ADVERTISER." 

"Franklin  W.  Smith  &  Brother,  a  well-known  Boston 
firm,  became  some  years  since,  contractors  for  the  supply 
of  numerous  classes  of  articles  at  the  Charlestown  Navy 
Yard,  and  had  delivered  merchandise  to  the  amount  of 
upwards  of  one  niillio7i  two  hundred  and  fifty  tkousa?id  dol- 
lars, when  Col.  Olcott  stopped  all  transactions  in  the  most 
summary  manner.  A  detective  inquisition  was  established 
that  called  before  it  more  than  one  hundred  parties  to  be 
probed   and   catechised."     *       *     "And  yet,    after  this 


65 


large  amount  of  business  had  been  inspected,  analyzed  and 
dissected  with  hostile  intent  as  never  before  was  a  like 
business  scrutinized,  the  only  frauds  which  could  be  in  any 
way  proved,  did  not  amount  to  two  thousand  dollars,  less 
than  one-sixteenth  of  one  per  cent,  upon  the  amount  of  the 
business. ' ' 


"  President  Lincoln  has  set  aside  the  findings  and  sen- 
tence of  the  Court,  and  it  is  to  be  hoped  that  Congress,  at 
its  next  session,  will  make  a  more  positive  reparation  to 
Mr.  Franklin  W.  Smith." 


"  Fortunately  for  Mr.  Smith,  he  had  influential  friends 
who  have  stood  by  him  manfully.  Messrs.  Sumner,  Gooch, 
Hooper,  and  other  members  of  the  Massachusetts  delega- 
tion in  Congress  ;  Mr.  Dix,  the  editor  of  tlie  Boston 
Journal ;  Messrs.  Benjamin  F.  Thomas,  C.  R.  Train  and 
George  P.  Sanger,  the  able  counsel  for  the  defense,  with 
scores  of  the  'solid  men  of  Boston,'  have  stood  between 
Mr.  Smith  and  his  persecutors,  and  they  have  seen  him 
safely  through." 


Extracts    from    the    Exhaustive    and    Unanimous  Report   of 

the  Special  Committee  of  the  BOSTON  BOARD 

OF  TRADE,  May  16,  1865. 

"In  order  to  'judge'  of  the  guilt  or  innocence  of 
Franklin  W.  Smith  as  a  '  Boston  merchant,'  and  to  recom- 
mend his  retention  or  expulsion  as  a  member  of  the  Gov- 
ernment of  this  Board,  your  Committee  deemed  the  reading, 
the  thorough  reading,  of  the  record  of  the  proceedings  of 
the  Court-martial,  unconditionally  indispensable.  And 
these  nineteen  hundred  and  thirteen  pages  have  been 
perused  with  care,  indeed  more  ;  for  we  have  in  our  pos- 
session upwards  of  eight  hundred  printed  pages,  which 
relate  more  or  less  directly  to  this  remarkable  trial,  which 
have  not  only  been  read,  but  the  material  facts  or  state- 


66 


ments  studied  and  mused  upon,  with  single  reference  to 
forming  a  righteous  'judgment'  in  the  premises.  Mention 
of  the  titles  of  this  mass  of  printed  matter  is  necessary  to 
show  how  thorough  and  searching  has  been  the  investiga- 
tion. 

' '  Thus,  then,  notes  of  every  thing  deemed  important 
have  been  made  from  the  following,  namely  : 

"Correspondence  with  E.  L.  Norton,  Navy  Agent, 
Boston. 

"  Analysis  of  certain  contracts  with  the  Bureau  of  Con- 
struction, and  with  the  Bureau  of  Steam  Engineering. 

' '  Bids  rejected  for  fictitious  prices. 

"Correspondence  with  the  Secretary  of  the  Navy,  and 
with  the  Commissioner  of  Naval  Code. 

"  Decisions  upon  the  acceptance  or  rejection  of  bids. 

"  Rejoinder  to  the  explanations  of  Naval  Bureaus  con- 
cerning the  awards  of  certain  bids. 

"  Correspondence  with  the  Bureau  of  Steam  Engineering. 

"Opinions  of  the  Press  in  the  case. 

"Reply  of  Smith  Brothers  &  Co.  to  the  Hon.  Mr. 
Grimes,   Senator  in  Congress  from  Iowa. 

"Correspondence  with  the  Hon.  John  P.  Hale,  Chairman 
of  the  Senate  Committee  on  Naval  Supplies. 

**  Letters  of  Smith  Brothers  &  Co.  to  several  Members  of 
Congress. 

"  Memorial  of  the  Senators  and  of  the  Representatives  in 
Congress  from  Massachusetts,  to  the  President  of  the  United 
States. 

"  Testimony  of  ninety  merchants  and  manufacturers  as  to 
the  quality  of  merchandise  purchased  by  Smith  Brothers  & 
Co.  for  the  Government. 

"  Correspondence  with  the  Chief  of  the  Bureau  of  Ord- 
nance, with  the  Chief  of  the  Bureau  of  Yards  and  Docks, 
and  with  the  Chief  of  the  Bureau  of  Construction. 

"  Evidence  before  the  Select  Committee  of  the  Senate  on 
Naval  Supplies,  with  the  Report  thereon. 

"  Correspondence  with  the  Chairman  of  the  House  Com- 
mittee on  Naval  Affairs. 

"Debate  in  the  House  of  Representatives,  March  2, 
1865. 


67 


"Speeches  of  Hon.  John  P.  Hale,  in  the  Senate,  Jan- 
uary, February,  and  May,  1865. 

"Arguments  of  Hon.  B.  F.  Thomas,  and  of  the  Judge 
Advocate,  in  the  case. 

"  Review  of  the  Argument  of  the  latter,  by  Franklin  W. 
Smith.     And,   finally  : 

"Opinion  on  the  case  to  the  President  of  the  United 
States,    by  Hon.  Charles  Sumner,    March   16,  1865. 

"These  are  all  the  papers  known  to  us,  which  connect 
the  Respondent  with  tlie  Navy  Department,  from  the  aus- 
picious beginning  down  to  the  Court-martial,  and  to  the 
present  hour. 

"Your  Committee,  as  the  result  of  their  labors,  nov.' 
express  the  opinion,  without  condition  or  qualification,  that 
the  *  Charges  and  Specification  of  Charges  preferred  by 
the  Secretary  of  the  Navy  against  Franklin  W.  Smith,' 
for  'fraud,'  and  for  'wilful  neglect  of  duty,'  are  not  sus- 
tained by  the  written  and  printed  matter  which  have  been 
mentioned  in  this  Report." 

' '  Whoever  reflects  upon  the  record  of  the  proceedings 
of  the  court-martial  in  the  case  before  us — which,  as  we 
have  once  said,  fill  onethousand  nine  hundred  and  thirteen 
(1,913),  manuscript  pages — may  wonder,  possibly,  that  our 
Associate  did  not  lose  his  understanding  and  his  life,  ere 
the  weary,  wearing,  agonizing  sixty-eight  days  were  at  an 
end.  Forty-five  other  days  elapsed  before  the  Judge- 
Advocate  concluded  his  argument  —  days  of  continued 
agony. 

"  And  all  this  in  the  name  of  Justice  !  The  noble  man 
who  bore  '  his  faculties  so  meek  ;'  who  was  '  so  clear  in  his 
great  office  ; '  on  whom  '  Treason  has  done  his  worst  ; ' 
and  who,  'after  life's  fitful  fever,  sleeps  well' — he  for 
whom  these  rooms  are  draped  in  '  suits  of  solemn  black  ; ' 
he,  the  Chief  Magistrate  of  the  nation,  interposed,  and  the 
convicted  but  innocent  merchant  became  free — free  ! 

The  report  concludes  as  follows  : 

"  And  now  we  append  the  '  Memorial  of  Senators  and 
Representatives  in   Congress    from  Massachusetts   to    the 


68 


President  of  the  United  States,  August,  1864,'  and  the 
'Testimonial  of  mercantile  and  manufacturing  houses,  July, 
1864,'  which,  as  will  be  seen  by  the  dates,  were  written 
previous  to  the  trial,  but  after  the  arrest  ;  and  the  '  Opinion 
of  the  Hon.  Charles  Sumner,'  prepared  by  request  of  the 
President  of  the  United  States,  which,  on  reflection,  we 
deem  necessary,  as  warranting  our  own  conclusions  in 
several  important  particulars,  and,  among  them,  our  un- 
conditional condemnation  of  the  sixteenth  section  of  the  act 
of  Congress  of  July  17,  1862,  as  applicable  to  civilians  in  the 
loyal  States  of  the  Union. 

"  IN  CONCLUDING  THE  TASK  ASSIGNED,  WE  DE- 
CLARE THAT,  IN  OUR  'JUDGMENT,'  FRANKLIN  W. 
SMITH  IS  AN  HONEST  MERCHANT,  AND  SHOULD 
STAND  ACQUITTED  OF  ALL  'FRAUD'  AND  ALL  IN- 
TENTION OF  '  FRAUD,'  AND  THAT,  CAREFUL  AND 
INDUSTRIOUS  IN  BUSINESS,  HE  SHOULD  BE  AC- 
QUITTED ALSO  OF  ALL  WILFUL  NEGLECT  OF  DUTY." 

"Respectfully  and  unanimously  submitted. 

"W.  B.  SPOONER, 
"CHARLES  G.  NAZRO, 
"CHARLES  O.  WHITMORE, 
"OTIS  NORCROSS, 
"JAMES  C.  CONVERSE, 
"JOSEPH  M.  WIGHTMAN, 
"LORENZO   SABINE. 

' '  FvOoms  of  the  Board  of  Trade, 
"Boston,  May  16,  1865." 

This  Report,  sixty-one  pages  octavo,  was  unani- 
mously adopted  by  the  Board,  and  Mr.  Smith  was  re- 
elected a  Director  without  a  dissenting  vote.  It  was 
published  with  the  Annual  Report  of  the  Board  for 
1865. 


69 


''NEW  YORK   TRIBUNE,"  January  13,  1866. 

' '  The  celebrated  case  of  Franklin  W.  Smith  &  Brother 
was  one  of  those  which  most  largely  helped  to  bring  mili- 
tary tribunals  into  public  contempt.  Those  two  gentlemen 
were  arrested  and  kept  in  confinement,  their  papers  seized, 
their  business  destroyed,  their  reputation  damaged,  and  a 
naval  court-martial,  '  organized  to  convict,'  pursued  them 
unrelentingly  till  a  wiser  and  juster  hand  arrested  the  malice 
of  their  persecutors.  It  is  known  that  President  Lincoln, 
after  full  investigation  of  the  case,  annulled  the  whole  pro- 
ceedings, but  it  is  remarkable  that  until  this  week  the 
actual  record  of  his  decision  could  never  be  obtained  from 
the  Navy  Department.  An  exact  copy  is  still  withheld, 
but  the  following  was  presented  on  Wednesday  to  the  Bos- 
ton Board  of  Trade  as  being  very  nearly  the  words  of  the 
late  President  : 

"  '  Whereas,  F>anklin  W.  Smith  had  transactions  with 
the  Navy  Department  to  the  amount  of  one  million  and  a 
quarter  of  a  million  of  dollars  ;  and,  whereas,  he  had  the 
chance  to  steal  a  quarter  of  a  million,  and  was  only  charged 
with  stealing  twenty-two  hundred  dollars — and  the  question 
now  is  abdut  his  stealing  a  hundred — I  don't  believe  he 
stole  anything  at  all.  Therefore,  the  record  and  findings 
are  disapproved — declared  null  and  void,  and  the  defend- 
ants are  fully  discharged.'* 

"  It  would  be  difficult  to  sum  up  the  rights  and  wrongs 
of  the  business  more  briefly  than  that,  or  to  find  a  para- 
graph more  characteristically  and  unmistakably^  Mr.  Lin- 
coln's. The  effect  of  the  President's  decision  was  not  to 
pardon  the  Messrs.  Smith — it  was  to  make  the  proceedings 
against  them  void  ab  initio,  to  censure  the  Court,  to  annul 
its  findings,  to  repair,  so  far  as  any  remedy  could  repair, 
the  atrocious  injustice  of  the  prosecution,  and  to  restore  the 
innocent  defendants  to  the  full  enjoyment  of  that  honorable 
repute  of  which  an  interested  malignity  had  attempted  to 
deprive  them." 

*The  illegal  and  spiteful  suppression  of  the  literal  decision  of 
President  Lincoln,  despite  the  protest  of  Senator  Sumner,  by  the 
Secretary  of  the  Navy  during  his  second  term  under  President 
Johnson,  is  detailed  under  Addenda  No.  VII, 


ADDENDA. 


I. 

M:  E  ]V1  O  R  I  AL 

SENATORS  AND  REPRESENTATIVES 

FROM     MASSACHUSETTS 

TO  THE 

PRESIDENT    OF    THE    UNITED    STATES 
CONCERNINO    S  Ivll  T  H     BROTHERS    &    CO. 

PREPARED   BY  HON.  CHAS.  SUMNER. 


TO   THE  PRESIDENT  OF  UNITED  STATES: 

The  undersigned,  Senators  and  Representatives  in  Con- 
gress from  Massachusetts,  ask  leave  to  call  your  serious 
attention  to  the  proceedings  initiated  by  the  Navy  Depart- 
ment against  Benjamin  G.  Smith  and  Franklin  W.  Smith, 
of  Boston,  of  the  firm  of  Smith  Brothers  &  Co.,  a  much 
respected  firm,  which  has  hitherto  enjoyed  the  confidence, 
personal  and  mercantile,  of  the  community  where  they 
reside. 

Among      their     neighbors     and     friends,     these     pro- 

70 


71 


ceedings  have  already  attracted  much  attention,  and 
awakened  corresponding  feeling. 

These  proceedings  have  seemed  to  be  harsh,  vindictive, 
and  unnecessary. 

(i.)  In  the  character  of  the  arrest  of  Messrs.  Smith, 
which  was  attended  by  circumstances  of  severity  utterly 
unjustifiable. 

(2.)  In  requiring  bonds  to  so  large  an  amount  as  half  a 
million  of  dollars.  The  fact  that  the  parties  in  question 
easily  obtained  bonds  for  a  much  larger  amount  does  not 
render  this  exaction  of  "  excessive  bail"  less  obnoxious  to 
the  requirements  of  the  Constitution  and  of  justice,  or  less 
indicative  of  the  spirit  in  which  these  proceedings  have 
been  conducted. 

(3.)  In  the  seizure  of  their  books  and  papers,  which  are 
still  detained,  although  regarded  by  their  eminent  counsel 
as  important  to  their  defense. 

(4.)  In  turning  into  a  military  offense  what  is  more 
proper  for  a  civil  tribunal,  and  dragging  these  defendants 
before  a  court-martial. 

(5.)  In  transferring  the  proceedings  from  Boston,  where 
the  parties  reside,  and  the  transactions  in  question  occurred, 
to  Philadelphia  ;  thus  increasing  greatly  the  difficulties  and 
the  expense  of  the  defense.  This  will  be  appreciated  when 
it  is  understood  that  the  witnesses  are  very  numerous,  and 
chiefly  engaged  in  mercantile  business,  so  that  they  cannot 
leave   Boston  without  the  neglect  of  their  private  interests. 

The  undersigned,  on  reviewing  these  circumstances, 
which  are  so  inconsistent  with  the  administration  of  justice 
in  its  ordinary  forms,  have  been  at  a  loss  to  account  for  the 
spirit  which  has  been  manifested  in  the  prosecution.  II 
they  look  at  the  trivial  character  of  most  of  the  specifica- 
tions against  the  defendants,  they  are  still  more  at  a  loss. 
It  is  difficult  to  account  for  such  elaborate  and  persistent 
harshness,  without  yielding  to  the  prevailing  belief  that 
other  motives  than  the  vindication  of  justice  have  entered 
into  this  case. 

The  undersigned  are  not  strangers  to  the  fact,  that  one 
of  these  defendants,  in  the  discharge  of  what  he  believed  to 
be  his  duty  as  a  good  citizen,  has,  by  correspondence  and 


72 


testimony  before  committees  of  Congress,  been  brought  into 
collision  with  officers  of  the  Navy  Department  ;  and  there 
is  too  much  reason  to  believe,  that  some  of  these  officers 
have  allowed  themselves  to  be  governed  by  personal  feel- 
ings throughout  these  strange  proceedings. 

Under  these  circumstances,  the  undersigned  most 
respectfully  ask  your  assistance  in  securing  justice  to  these 
defendants,  according  to  the  common  course  of  proceedings 
at  law.  They  are  acquainted  with  the  statute  which  pro- 
vides court-martial  for  contractors  in  certain  cases,  and  they 
are  unwilling  to  make  any  suggestion  which  shall  interfere 
with  its  efficiency  ;  but  they  have  no  hesitation  in  saying, 
that  such  a  statute,  which  was  intended  for  extreme  cases, 
should  not  be  apphed  to  a  case  like  the  present,  where, 
with  a  single  exception,  the  questions  are  simply  whether 
the  defendants  complied  with  their  coiitrad,  and  therefore, 
from  their  nature,  can  be  better  considered  by  the  ordinary 
tribunals,  accustomed  to  such  questions,  than  by  a  naval 
tribunal  composed  of  officers  who  have  no  familiarity  with 
them. 

If  the  pending  proceedings  against  the  Messrs.  Smith 
should  be  continued,  there  are  two  courses  with  regard  to 
them  which  may  be  recommended  : 

First,  That  they  should  be  transferred  at  once  to  the 
United  States  Court  in  Massachusetts,  and  be  placed  under 
the  direction  of  the  learned  Attorney  of  the  United  States 
for  that  district. 

Secondly,  If  the  foregoing  order  is  not  deemed  expedient, 
on  the  existing  evidence,  then  a  commission  or  commis- 
sioner might  be  appointed  by  the  President  to  inquire  into 
the  circumstances  attending  the  arrest  of  the  defendants, 
and  also  into  the  nature  of  the  charges  against  them,  in 
order  to  ascertain  and  report  if  there  is  any  sufficient  reason 
for  the  singular  harshness  to  which  they  have  been  already 
subjected,  and  also  for  the  exceptional  proceedings  which 
have  been  instituted  against  them. 

But  for  the  sake  of  justice,  and  to  relieve  the  Govern- 
ment from  all  suspicion  of  undue  harshness,  the  undersigned 
protest  against  the  spirit  in  which  these  proceedings  have 
been   conducted,  and  appeal  to  you  for  such  remedy  as 


73 


shall  seem  best  ;  to  the  end  that  the  public  interests  may  be 
adequately  protected  without  any  sacrifice  of  the  rights  of 
the  citizens,  and  without  needless  interference  with  the 
order  of  business.  (Signed) 

CHARLES  SUMNER, 
HENRY  WILSON, 
THOS.  D.  ELIOT, 
HENRY  L.  DAWES, 
S.  HOOPER, 
JOHN  B.  ALLEY, 

by  C.  Sumner,  as  by  letter. 

D.  W.  GOOCH, 
WILLIAM  B.  WASHBURN, 
JOHN   D.  BALDWIN, 
August,  1864,  GEORGE  S.  BOUTWELL, 


Exiraci  from  a  Letter  of  HON.  A.  H.  RICE. 

Bangor,  Me.,  August  15,  1864. 


To  the  President , 


I  have  no  hesitation  in  saying,  that  the  community  in 
which  Smith  Brothers  reside  is  quite  unanimous  in  believing 
that  they  have  committed  no  offence  of  a  criminal  or 
fraudulent  character  ;  and  that  the  proceedings  which  have 
been  instituted  against  them  are  not  only  needlessly  severe, 
but  they  are  especially  objectionable,  on  the  ground  that 
they  inflict  upon  them  irreparable  injury,  before  they  have 
been  found  guilty  of  any  crime.  Measures  so  extraordinary 
and  severe  naturally  give  the  impression  that  the  Govern- 
ment esteems  them  guilty  of  extraordinary  crimes  ;  or  else 
that  the  Government  is  using  its  authority  and  power,  not 
for  the  protection,  but  for  the  destruction  of  private,  indi- 
vidual immunities. 


11. 

TESTIMONIAL  OF  MERGMILE  MD  MflNUFJlGTURING  HOUSES 

*S    TO    THE 

QUALITY   OF   MERCHANDISE   PURCHASED 

—  BY  — 

SMITH  BROTHERS  FOR  GOVERNMENT.* 


We,  the  undersigned,  having  furnished  Smith  Brothers 
&  Co.  with  merchandise  at  various  times  within  the  past 
three  years,  destined  for  the  use  of  the  United  States  Navy 
Department,  hereby  certify  that  we  have,  in  all  cases,  sold 
and  delivered  to  them  such  qualities  as  we  believed  would 
be  entirely  satisfactory  to  and  fitted  for  the  use  of  the 
Department,  and  such  as  we  should  have  supplied  had  the 
order  been  made  upon  us  directly  by  the  Government. 

Boston,  July  20,  1864. 

Revere  Copper  Co.,  by  S.  T.  Snow,  Agent, 

Sheet  and  Bolt  Copper  and  Sheathing  Metal,  Ingot  Copper, 

Tin,  Comp.  Nails. 

Richards  &  Co Metals,  Wire,  &c. 

J.  H.  Chadwick  &  Co.,  Agents  Boston  Lead  Co Lead 

Fuller  &  Dana Iron 

Banker  &  Carpenter .   Paints,  Drugs,  Oils,  &c. 

Southard,  Herbert  &  Co Sperm  and  Whale  Oils 

Tuckerman  &  Cate Iron 

Holmes,  Booth  &  Hayden,  by  B.  F.  Adams,  Agent, 

Sheet  Brass,  Brass  and  Copper  Wire 

E.  P.  Cuder Pig  Iron 

James  L.  Mills  &  Son Dealers  in  Cooperage  Stock 

Bush  &  Mills Dealers  in  Stoves  and  Iron 

Davis  &  Chaddock Fire  Brick,  &c. 

*  The  value  of  the  merchandise  thus  purchased  by  Smith  Bros, 
for  the  Navy  Department  has  been  not  less  than  |i, 000,000. 

74 


76 


Foster  &  Roby Composition  Lights,  Buttons,  &c. 

F.  W.  Lincoln,  jun.,  &  Co Patent  Logs,  Glasses 

Gay,  Manson  &  Co Iron  and  Steel 

David  Barnes  &  Co Anchors,  Chains  and  Ship  Chandlery 

Henry  W.  Burr Packing  and  Hose 

Francis  McLoughlin Brushes 

Flint  &  Hall Lumber 

Sanborn,  Richardson  &  Co Iron  Pipes 

Fairbanks,  Brown  &  Co Scales 

Lewis  Audenried  &  Co.,  per  H.  W.  Morse,  Att'y,  Cumberland  Coal 

Dodge,  Gilbert  &  Co Hardware 

Shelton  &  Cheever Leather,  Leading  and  Suction  Hose 

John  C.  Haynes  &  Co • Drums 

A.  N.  Clarke  &  Co Leather  Belting 

Underbill  Edge-Tool  Co Navy  Hatchets 

Nathaniel  R.  Leman,  jun Wool  Skins 

Bullard,  Abbott  &  Co Steel 

T.  Quincy  Browne  Ingot  Copper 

American  Net  Company,  by  Wm.  Howe,  P.  Attorney, 

Nets,  Seines,  Lines  and  Twines 
Dalton  &  Ingersoll Plumber  Stock 

B.  Y.  Pippey  &  Co Cotton  Waste 

Vincent  Laforme Boatswains'  Calls 

H.  H.  Morse,  Supt.  A.  S.  G.  Co Steam  Guages 

Boston  Belting  Co.,  John  G.  Tappan,  Treas.  .  India-Rubber  Goods 

E.  R.  Morse Iron  Works 

Thos.  Flint  &  Co Hardware 

Herman  Strater  &  Son Copper  Utensils 

J.  S.  F.  Huddleston Meteorological  Instruments 

Howe  &  French Drugs  and  Paints 

Linden  &  Meyer Quicksilver 

Samuel  Hill Chains 

George  L.  Stearns  &  Co Lead 

Chas.  V.  Poor  &  Co Drugs  and  Paints 

Boston  &  Sandwich  Glass  Co.,  per  Sewall  H.  Fessenden,  Ag't, 

Port  Lights 

Geo.  W.  Robinson  &  Co Ship  Lights,  Hinges,  &c. 

J.  Kittridge  &  Co Naval  Stores 

Daniel  Cummings  &  Co Wooden  Ware 

Old-Colony  Iron  Co Nails 

Day,  Wilcox  &  Co Leather 


76 


P.  Waldemeyer  &  Co Leather 

Henry  H.  Packer   .  * Ratchet  Drills 

Deans  &  Bagnall Metals 

List  of  Parties,  not  in  Boston,  who  have  Signed  the  above  Paper : 

Townsend  &  Co.,  New  York Pig  Iron 

Samuel  Mulliken  &  Co.,  New  York Steele 

Kemble  &  Warner,  New  York .    .    .    Boiler  Iron 

American  Screw  Co.,  Providence Screws 

Crocker  Bros.  &  Co.,  Taunton Nails  and  Rivits 

Phoenix  Manufacturing  Co.,  Taunton Crucibles 

Plymouth  Mills Rivets 

Thos.  Prosser  &  Son,  N.  J Boilei  Tubes,  &c. 

Providence  Tool  Co.,  Providence  ......  Bolts  and  Hardware 

Knowles  &  Sibley,  Warren,  Mass Steam  Pumps 

Theophilus  N.  Breed,  Lynn Grindstones 

C.  Drew  &  Co.,  Kingston Augers 

J.  Roberts  &  Co.,  Waltham,  Mass Tarred  Paper 

Plymouth  Tack  and  Rivet  Co Nails,  Tacks,  &c. 

R.  Dudgeon,  N.  J Hydraulic  Jacks 

Munsell  &  Thompson,  N.  J Forges 

Trenton  Iron  Co Bar  Iron 

L.  &  A.  G.  Coes,  Worcester Wrenches 

New  Bedford  Copper  Co Copper  Goods 

Buck  Brothers,  Worcester Chisels 

Lesley  &  Co.,  Philadelphia Handirons 

Lenox  Iron  Works,  Lenox,  Mass Pig  Iron 

Novelty  Iron  Works,  N.  J Apparatus 

William  Porter  &  Son,  New  York Lanterns 

American  Butt  Co Butts 

Cheney  &  Lerow Hammers 

J.  L.  Hommedieu Augers 

M.  J.  Ryerson Hammered  Iron 

C.  E.  Peenock  &  Co Boiler  Iron 

Westbrook  Forge  Co Hammered  Iron 

Bemis  &  Call,  H.  W.  &  T.  Co Hardware 

Charles  Alden Emery  Cloth  and  Facings 

Roys,  Wilcox  &  Co Turners'Tools 

Eagle  Lock  Co Locks 

Kinsley  Iron  Manufacturing  Co Bar  Iron 


III. 

FARTHER    EVIDENCE   OF   THE 

''ORIGIN  OF  THESE  UNFORTUNATE  PROCEEDINGS' 

IN  THE 

MORTIFICATION    AND    REVENGE 

OF  THE  CHIEF  OF  THE  BUREAU  OF  ORDNANCE  OF  THE  U.  8.  NAVY  DEPARTMENT. 


The  hostility  of  this  official  had  already  been  indicated, 
resulting  from  the  overruling  of  his  decision  by  the  um- 
pire in  a  matter  of  boiler  iron.  That  settlement  was 
effected  on  the  6th  of  February,  1 864. 

On  the  25th  of  February,  F.  W.  Smith  was  informed 
that  this  chief  of  bureau  had  asserted  in  his  office  in 
Washington  that  Smith  Brothers  had  delivered  Revely 
tin  for  Banca,  and  had  offered  to  refund  money ;  a 
charge  which  the  firm  immediately  denied.  The  chief 
replied,  reiterating  the  charge  and  inclosing  a  voucher 
for  504^  pounds  Banca  tin  at  56  cents,  alleging  that  it 
was  Revely,  and  demanding  a  refund  of  money. 

Smith  Brothers  replied : 

' '  We  claim  this  was  Banca,  as  described.  You  offer  no 
''proof,  but  merely  assume  to  the  contrary.  Any  further 
* '  claim  for  restitution  by  us  must  be  accompanied  by  proof 
''that  the  articles  were  not  as  described. 

*  *  "  We  called  upon  you  to  comply  courteously  with 
' '  your  request  for  a  copy  of  our  paper  upon  '  purchases  of 
* '  naval  supplies. '     Conversation  ensued,  initiated  spiritedly 

,     77 


78 


* '  by  yourself,  concerning  the  delivery  of  Revely  tin  for 
"  Banca,  though  you  disclaimed  any  insinuation  upon 
"  Smith  Brothers. 

"Yet  a  scandalous  perversion  of  this  conversation 
"  quickly  followed  us  upon  our  return.  This  experience 
"will  forbid  further  communication  in  future  with  the 
"  bureau,  except  by  writing. 

"  It  is  appropriate  to  remark,  under  these  circumstances, 
"that  the  important  relations  of  government  officers  should 
"keep  them  free  from  defamatory  gossip  ;  especially  when 
"it  is  known  that  it  has  been  traced  from  thence  directly 
"  to  the  public  press. 

"We  remain  your  obedient  servants, 

"Smith  Brothers  &  Co." 

Despite  the  offer  of  proof  to  the  contrary,  the  chief 
maintained  his  charge  as  to  the  tin,  and  wrote  Hon. 
John  P.  Hale,  Chairman  of  the  Senate  Committee,  to 
that  effect  on  the  2ist  of  May,  1864. 

On  the  same  date  he  attempted  to  ''  make  the  wool 
fly  "  by  testimony  as  follow^s  : 

Question.  "  In  your  answer  to  the  twelfth  interrogatory 
you  state  that  there  was  $100,000  worth  of  tin  called  Straits 
tin  furnished  for  Banca  tin  and  charged  as  Banca  tin.  Do 
you  know  of  your  knowledge  whether  Smith  Brothers  & 
Company  ever  delivered  any  tin  for  Banca  that  was  not?  " 

Answer.  ' '  I  have  every  reason  to  believe  that  they 
never  delivered  one  single  pound  of  Banca  tin,  although  in 
one  bill  they  charged  Banca  tin  and  delivered  Straits  tin." 

Subsequently  the  witness  was  asked : 

Question.  "Were  these  interrogatories  submitted  to 
you  some  time  ago  by  the  Navy  Department?  " 

Answer.  "They  were  not  submitted  to  me  by  the  Navy 
Department." 


79 


Question.     ' '  You  have  seen  them  ?  ' ' 

Answer.     "  Yes,  sir." 

Question.     *'  Where  did  you  see  them  ?  " 

Answer.  "I  prepared  them  myself,  because  I  was  told 
by  the  Navy  Department  that  I  should  be  sworn." 

Question.  "Did  you  prepare  your  answer  to  them  in 
writing  before  you  came  here?  " 

Answer.  "  Yes,  after  having  full  knowledge  of  the  facts, 
and  after  going  over  the  whole  business." 

The  falsity  of  this  testimony  was  finally  established  by 
the  testimony  of  the  naval  officer,  Inspector  of  Ordnance  at 
the  Navy  Yard,  and  the  personal  friend  of  the  chief,  as 
admitted  in  evidence,  by  testimony  as  follows,  from  the 
recofd: 

"  In  my  examination  to-day  I  have  found  a  requisition 
"that  was  supplied  by  Smith  Brothers,  of  Banca  tin.  May 
"  i6,  1863.  Banca  tin  was  furnished  by  Smith  Brothers 
"  on  that  occasion.  I  know  it  to  be  Banca  tin.  There 
"  were  504^  pounds  at  56  cents,  Banca  tin." 

This  swift  witness  was  the  author  of  the  "  dead-cock- 
in-the-pit "  letter,  of  whom  Senator  Sumner  wrote: 

"The  writer  of  this  letter,  after  appearing  before  the 
'  *  Senate  Committee  at  a  later  day,  came  on  from  Washing- 
' '  ton  to  appear  as  a  witness  against  the  respondents  at 
"  Charlestown,  where  he  underwent  a  cross-examination — 
"on  which  I  forbear  to  comment." 


I  V. 

SPECIMEN  OF  THE  METHODS  OF  THF  DETECTIVE  INQUISITION. 

TERRORISM    OF   WITNESSES. 
FALSE  ENTRIES   UPON    AFFIDAVITS. 


Extracts    from  the    Sworn    Testimony  of  a    Witness    before 
the  Detective  Inquisition. 

Interrogatory  26.  To  the  question  whether  he  had 
swurn  to  the  statement  cited,  the  witness  answered  :  "It 
might  be  something  similar  to  that.  After  this  man  read 
what  was  written,  another  man  wrote  on  a  piece  of  paper. " 

Interrogatory  27.  "  Did  he  not  read  it  over  to  you  after- 
ward ? ' ' 

Answer.     "  He  did,  sir." 

Interrogatory  28.     "  And  did  you  not  sign  it?  " 

Answer.  "Yes,  sir  ;  I  told  him  there  were  a  great  many 
things  in  that  paper  that  were  not  right,  and  he  said  it  was 
not  anything  very  particular.  I  wanted  to  get  it  right. 
He  wanted  me  to  go  down  stairs  and  sign  it,  and  I  told  a 
man  down  there  I  did  not  want  to  sign  it." 


Answer.     "  I  did  not  think  it  was  right — anywhere  near. 

He  did  not  ask  me  any  questions.      I   did  not  think  that 

was  right  at  the  time." 

Interrogatory  38.     "  Wherein  was  it  not  right?  " 
Answer.     '  *  Because  he  sat  down  and  read  it  over,  and 

80 


81 


wrote  what  he  had  a  mind  to,  and  I  told  him  about  a  great 
many  things,  and  he  said  it  did  not  amount  to  anything. 
There  were  things  there  stated  that  there  was  nothing  of 
truth  in." 


Answer.  "  The  objections  that  I  made  to  signing  that 
paper  were,  that  he  sat  down  there,  and  took  and  read  off 
all  his  stuff,  and  if  I  said  anything  about  it,  he  said  that 
would  not  make  any  difference,  and  he  read  off  what  he 
wanted.  He  called  another  man  to  write,  and  I  told  him 
it  was  not  right." 

Cross- Interrogatory  15  "Then  this  was  it:  one  man 
dictated  to  another  man  what  to  write  ;  told  him  what  to 
write  ;  the  other  man  wrote  down  what  the  other  directed 
to  write  ;  and  thereupon  you  were  required  to  sign  it.  Is 
that  so?" 

Answer.     "That  was  so." 

Interrogatory.  "  Did  you  receive  a  message  from  this 
man,  that  if  you  did  not  produce  your  books  they  would 
come  and  take  them  by  force?  " 

Answer.  "No;  but  he  said  so  with  his  own  mouth, 
with  his  own  lips.     When  I  was  up  there  he  said  it." 

The  witness  added  to  his  answer  to  the  last  question  : 
"  And  he  said  that  he  would  make  me  go  to  Washington." 


Comment  on  the  above  in  Argument  of  HON.  B.  F.  THOMAS, 
Counsel  for  F.   W.  Smith. 

' '  Let  this  record  stand  without  a  line  or  word  erased. 
"It  is  confused,  indistinct,  stupid,  if  you  will,  but  rays  of 
"truth  stream  through  it  as  sunlight  through  the  clouds. 
"It  is  not  an  artificial  story.  *  *  The  affidavit  was 
"carelessly,  recklessly  taken,  without  any  regard  of  the 
' '  rights  of  the  witness,  or  of  the  party  whom  it  was  the 
' '  design  of  the  party  taking  it  to  implicate. 

' '  If  the  witness  did  not  exhibit  all  the  courage  and  inde- 
* '  pendence  becoming  an  American  citizen,  some  allowance 
* '  must  be  made  for  the  times. 


82 


"  The  merchants  with  whom  he  had  been  dealing  had 
"been  sent  to  a  fortress  without  any  complaint  filed 
"against  them  ;  and  without  any  just  cause  of  complaint, 
' '  what  should  save  him  from  Fort  Warren  or  Washington  ? 

"This  record  may  stand  as  a  sample  of  the  method  in 
"which  this  prosecution  has  been  got  up  against  the  ac- 
"cused  before  it  passed  into  the  hands  of  the  judges-advo- 
"  cate  and  of  the  unseen  powers  and  instruments  with  which 
"  he  has  had  to  contend  ;  the  poisoned  arrows  coming  out 
"of  the  darkness." 

Is  not  this  the  record  of  a  Star  Chamber,  in  the 
American  Republic,  midway  of  the  nineteenth  century  ? 


V. 

FALSIFICATIONS  AND  PERVERSIONS  OF  TESTIMONY 

BY    JUDGKS-AOVOCAXK. 


From  a  Review  of  the  Argument  of  the  Judge-Advocate, 
by  F.   W.  Smith. 

The  Prefatory  Note  was  as  follows : 

The  errors  and  perversions  of  testimony  in  the  argu- 
ment of  the  judge-advocate,  were  so  many  and  so  gross, 
that  it  was  thought  expedient  to  notice  a  few  of  them. 
They  might  mislead  those  who  had  no  opportunity  to 
consult  the  record  of  the  evidence. 

The  engagements  of  my  counsel  being  such  that  they 
could  not  give  to  the  matter  early  attention,  I  have,  at 
their  solicitation,  attempted  the  task  myself 

>{c  :{<  :{c  H<  * 

I  submit  the  result  of  this  further  effort  to  inform  the 
public  of  the  facts  in  the  case,  to  the  candid  judgment 
of  those  who  may  be  interested  to  examine  it. 

F.  W.  S. 

Sixty-eight  citations  from  the  argument  of  the  judge- 
advocate  were  compared  with  the  stenographic  record 
of  the  court,  to  illustrate  the  reckless  falsification  and 
perversion  of  the  testimony.  This  review  was  mailed  to 
all  members  of  Congress  and  to  the  revising  counsel  of 
the  Navy  Department ;  after  its  receipt  he  abandoned 
all  charges  save  the  one  hundred  dollers  on  tin. 

83 


84 


The  introduction  to  the  document  (144  pages  octavo), 
is  as  follows : 

On  the  nth  day  of  January,  1865,  the  one  hundred 
and  thirteenth  day  from  the  commencement  of  the  hear- 
ing, Judge-Advocate  Smith  concluded  his  reply  to  the 
argument  of  counsel  for  the  defense.  The  most  sacred 
interests  of  the  respondent  were  now  to  be  adjudicated, 
not  by  the  unanimous  decision  of  twelve  of  his  fellow- 
citizens,  but  by  the  vpte  of  four  among  seven  naval 
officers,  from  distant  sections  of  the  country,  appointed 
by  the  accusing  party,  and  sworn  to  secrecy  as  to  their 
respective  judgments;  the  judges-advocate  remaining 
with  the  court. 

This  is  a  feature  of  courts-martial  peculiarly  abhor- 
rent to  our  sense  of  justice,  that  when  they  have  had  the 
last  word  in  argument^  however  unjust  in  spirit  or  untrue 
in  statement  the  judges-advocate  are  present  at  the  pri- 
vate deliberations  of  those  acting  as  judge  and  jury,  de- 
ciding upon  both  law  and  fact. 


From  among  more  than  Jive  thousand  business  and 
private  letters  and  copies  of  letters,  forcibly  seized  from 
Smith  Brothers  &  Co.,  and  subject  to  the  scrutiny  of 
detectives  for  months,  there  were  but  two  which  could 
be  perverted  to  their  apparent  injury,  except  that,  upon 
the  misinterpretation  of  which,  the  specification  as  to 
Sterling  iron  was  based. 

It  is,  therefore,  necessary  to  refute  these  insinuations ; 
and  to  show  that   said   letters,  like  every  writing  or  act 


85 


of  Smith  Brothers  &  Co.  upon  the  record  of  the  hearing, 
so  far  from  tarnishing,  do  vindicate  their  reputation  for 
integrity. 

The  final  recapitulation  of  arguments  in  defense  from 
the  Review  was  prefaced  as  follows  : 

The  defendant  asks  for  an  impartial  judgment  upon 
the  record  of  his  defense ;  the  record  being  viewed  in 
the  light  of  all  surrounding  circumstances. 

A  BUSINESS  OF  $1,250,000,  covering  an  almost  infinite 
variety  of  detail,  prosecuted  at  a  period  of  unprecedented 
excitement  in  the  business  world  ;  of  scarcity  of  mer- 
chandise, of  financial  panic  and  uncertainty  ;  a  business 
involving  inevitably  the  "  work  of  other  men's  hands," 
and  reliance  upon  other  men's  faithfulness — this  business 
hunted,  pried  into,  from  March  until  September,  by  a 
secret  detective  inquisition  that  called  before  it  more 
than  one  hundred  different  parties  to  be  probed  and 
catechised ;  an  inquisition  that  in  June,  under  military 
authority,  seized  all  the  business  and  private  books, 
papers  and  correspondence  of  the  firm  from  warehouse 
and  dwellings,  that  had  then  all  original  letters,  invoices, 
and  entries  under  its  hand,  by  which  it  could  trace  every 
transaction  from  its  inception  to  its  conclusion,  its  profit, 
its  payment ;  that  called  to  its  aid  accountant  experts  to 
fathom  the  ledgers  and  cash  books ;  this  business,  thus 

DISSECTED  AND  ANALYZED  WITH  HOSTILE  INTENT,  AS  NEVER 
BEFORE  WAS  A  LIKE  BUSINESS  SCRUTINIZED  IN  NeW  ENG- 
LAND, REVEALED  FIVE  SUCH  CHARGES  OF  FRAUD,  AS  HAVE 
BEEN     ANSWERED    AND    DEFENDED     BY    THE    RESPONDENT  ! 


86 


Five  charges  which,  if  proved,  would  not  amount  to  two 
thousand  dollars — less  than  one-sixth  of  one  per  cent, 
upon  the  amount  of  the  business.  Such  were  the  de- 
velopments of  an  inquisition  upon,  as  the  judge-advocate 
asserts,  "  an  extensive  system  of  frauds."  Such,  the 
charges,  upon  which,  in  addition  to  the  severities  and 
indignities  above  mentioned,  the  respondent  was  prose- 
cuted, bail  demanded  of  five  hundred  thousand  dollars, 
and  he  was  subjected  to  a  military  trial  of  four  months' 
duration,  nearly  ruinous  to  his  health,  destructive  to  his 
business,  and  costing  him  in  legal  and  other  expenses 
attending  the  trial,  more  than  ;^20,ooo,  and  in  losses  re- 
sulting to  his  business  of  an  equal  amount. 

The  terse,  incisive  verdict  of  Preside?tt  Lincoln  upon  this 
history,  it  has  been  seen,  was  based  upon  the  self-evident 
absurdity  of  the  allegations. 


VI. 
COST  OF   NAVAL  SUPPLIES 


AFTER   THE 


SUPPRESSION  OF  THE  BUSINESS  OF  SMITH  BROTHERS 

profits  of  their  successors. 
Prices   Increased   33   1-3    Per  Cent. 


The  military  seizure  of  the  warehouse  of  Smith 
Brothers  &  Co.  was  at  the  precise  period  of  advertise- 
ment for  annual  supplies.  Although  the  inquisition  had 
been  in  session  three  months  in  Boston,  no  charges  were 
preferred  until  a  month  after  the  pillage  of  their  premises 
and  the  paralysis  of  their  business,  at  a  great  loss. 
Many  papers  have  never  been  recovered. 

Thus,  when  it  had  been  found  that  official  opposition 
and  annoyance  would  not  drive  them  from  the  field,  the 
war  power  was  invoked,  their  business  wrested  from 
them,  and  all  their  resources  of  mental  endurance  and 
pecuniary  strength  demanded  in  defense  from  utter  ruin. 
Then,  upon  the  award  of  new  contracts,  men  who  had 
solicited  them  to  participate  in  bribery,  and  had  been 
repelled,  succeeded  to  government  patronage.     • 

So  great  was  the  shock  to  the  business  community  by 
the  violence  toward  Smith  Brothers  (as  had  been  pre- 

87 


88 


dieted  by  the  delegation  from  Massachusetts,  in  their 
paper  to  the  President),  that  respectable  mercantile 
houses  dared  not  enter  the  competition. 

Therefore,  while  Franklin  W.  Smith  was  being 
hounded  on  a  pretense  of  one  hundred  dollars  difference 
in  value  between  Banca  and  Revely  tin  (where  no  differ- 
ence was  proven  to  exist),  the  government  entered  into 
contract  to  such  astounding  damage  as  the  following 
contracts  reveal. 

These  were  the  "  spoils  "  to  private  parties  from  the 
government  treasury,  following  the  "  raid  "  of  the  Navy 
Department  on  Smith  Brothers  for  an  alleged  wrong  of 
;^ioo;  a  raid  that  cost  the  government  not  less  than 
;^40,ooo  for  expenses  of  inquisition  and  prosecution  : 


89 


!i  2 

!'  ^ 

'  o: 
o 

I 

O 


Ol  CD 


Oi  O  O  O  Cn  O  O 

O  O  O  O  O  O  O 

o  o  o  o  o  o  o 


*-*.    3    ^    O    «-t    i-t    I-! 


^    (15 


o  o  o 


o  5  14  S 

'   3  ^p  -t  ^  l-i 

^p  f;?  tuo  o  o 

c«  •     p  °   3  g  "qj  ^ 

S     -       o  5F-0 


(Dd)®®®®©  ? 


noon  n  on. 'i^ 

K) 

00 
^    I 


C/i  1-'  Or  00  CO 
CO  4^  Oi  O  ^  O 
O  O  O  O  Ot  o 

o  oo  o  o  o 

o  o  o  o  o  o 


o  Oi  o  o  ^j  00  o; 
n  o  n  n  n  n  n 
Sn  cK"  yj"  cfi  cH'  en  yT 


oo  h-i  o  t-o  i-i  oo 
cs  to  o  o  OT  oo  cr; 
o  o  o  o  Oi  o  o 


01   O) 


Or  oo  to 

ooo 

oo                   to 

o  o  o 

85§§§8 

ooo 

ooo 

p;:  cr  cr  cr  cr  ?;: 

C/3    Cfl    C/5 

Brazier' 
es  Tin  pi 
es  Tin  pi 
es  Tin  pi 
es  Tin  pi 

Pewter  s 

w^w 

tieet  2 
ig  zin 
traits 

O  ^  ^  V  V  ""   n 

— -^              !-• 

-"^                     P 

p^ct  oi  cti  a>  Q  n 

o       "         ■*     ■-"< 

'    :^"  4^  ix;  Cj  fT> 

too  en         ;? 

-^  a      = 

1X1  •-*-               =r 

p  o 


c  < 

a>  O) 


o 

o 


O 


(i)(i)(I)(i)(i)(D'^(i)(i)(i) 

Oi  on  ^  4^ 

O  Oi  en  bO        W 


'^ 


Oi  O  O  Q.  O  ^  ' 
Oi  O  O  oo  O 


Q  to  4i- 

O  OO  O 

n  n 


"I 


b  3 

3  CO 

W  «^ 
0 


w 

rf^  ^1 

;    O 

en  OT 

!     (^ 

•<r  oc 

i    GO 

too 

,  1  o< 

001 

i  o 

oo 

'  V 

oo 

Oi        =Mi 
j,0  OOjlO         -     JOGOOO 

I— '  cnVrVi  (—'(—'  o  4^'o 
OiOOiCnO*^  ooo 
en  O  O  O  O  O        ooo 


o  o  oo  Q  o 

o  o  o  o  o  o 


ooo 
ooo 


CD 

CO 

CD 

o 

CD 


53     O 


to  oo  rfi.  bO 

Ci  O  O  GO 

OO  O  O  O  O  4^ 

o  o  o  o  o  o 
n  n 


to  en  o  *. 

o  o<  o  o  o  oo 
o  o  o  o  oo 


C:  ^  to2i 
tOOi  OOj^ 
o  o  o  ft 

■    ■    *    < 


00 

I 

00 
en 


oo 


>  CO  Op 

>  O  O  c 

)  oos 


90 


Senator  Sumner,  in  his  seventh  argument  in   defense 
of  the  tin  transaction  of  Smith  Brothers,  says  : 

"  The  price  of  tin  was 52 

"  Add  store  expense^nd  interest  and  5  per  cent  .    .0260 

.5460 
"  Com.  @  5  per  cent. 0273 

"On  but  504  pounds  the  price  charged  was  but 

57  cents 5733 

"  In  the  contract  of  their  successors,  tin  at  a  cost  of  62 
cents  was  sold  for  $1  in  a  quantity  of  50,000  pounds." 


Exhibit  of  the  Profits  of  Smith  Brothers  &  Co.  on 
Government  Business. 

During  the  cross-examination  of  Mr.  B.  G.  Smith,  the 
judge-advocate  produced  from  the  papers  of  Smith 
Brothers  &  Co.  an  elaborate  exhibit  of  the  profit  and 
loss  upon  all  their  government  business,  from  its  com- 
mencement in  1 86 1  to  February  i,  1862. 

Mr.  Smith  testified  that  it  was  a  private  paper,  pre- 
pared by  his  brother  for  his  own  satisfaction,  and  that 
it  was  among  those  forcibly  abstracted  from  his  brother's 
dwelling-house.  It  was  the  only  statement  of  the  kind 
which  had  been  made,  and  was  most  opportune  evidence 
in  support  of  his  account  of  the  profits  from  the  business 
of  the  firm. 


91 


Mr.  B.  G.  Smith  further  stated  that  he  had  never  be-, 
fore  seen  the  paper,  except  at  the  time  it  was  prepared 
and  that  he  then  observed  only  the  results,  not  spending 
over  ten  minutes  in  its  examination. 

This  exhibit,  accidentally  produced  by  the  prose- 
cutors, DEMONSTRATED  THAT  THE  AVERAGE    NET  PROFITS 

TO  Smith  Brothers  &  Co.,  upon  government  business, 

HAD  been  only  ABOUT  FIVE  PER  CENT. 


SUPPRESSION  OF  THE  DECISION  OF  PRESIDENT  LINCOLN 

BY  SECRETARY  WELLES,  FOR  FOUR  YEARS, 

DURING  THE  ADMINISTRATION   OF  PRESI  DENT  JOH  NSON. 


REVISION   OF  THE  VERDICT   OF  THE  COURT 

BY  COUNSEL  OF  THE  NAVY  DEPARTMENT. 


Upon  the  annulment  of  the  case  by  President  Lincoln, 
there  was  great  public  interest  to  know  the  precise  terms 
of  his  decision.  His  assassination  followed  immediately  ; 
and  it  was  supposed  that  the  promulgation  of  his  dis 
approval  was  simply  overlooked  in  the  direful  excitement 
of  that  tragedy.  Meanwhile,  it  was  reported  that  the 
endorsement  of  the  President  was  remarkably  quaint 
and  characteristic ;  and  a  humorous  version  of  it  was 
published  throughout  the  country.  (V.  Ex.  N.  Y. 
Tribune) 

At  length  Senator  Sumner,  in  behalf  of  Mr.  Smith, 
called  upon  the  Secretary  of  the  Navy  for  an  official 
copy  of  the  record.  To  his  astonishment  and  indigna- 
tion it  was  refused  by  the  Secretary,  on  the  ground  that 
it  was  his  duty  to  shield  the  court  from  further  repre- 
hension. A  lengthy  correspondence  ensued,  Mr.  Sum- 
ner claiming  that  the  record  was  not  only  of  right  the 
property  of  Mr.  Smith,  but  also  of  the  public.  Tired  of 
conflict,  the  respondent  in  the  case  decided  to  await 
Secretary  Welles'  retirement  from  office. 

92 


98 


Not  until  1869  did  he  have  access  to  the  record  ol 
the  court,  in  the  archives  of  the  Navy  Department.  It 
may  be  seen  on  their  shelves,  in  ten  massive  volumes 
folio ;  by  far  the  most  voluminous  and,  consequently, 
most  expensive  record  of  a  court-martial  since  the  foun- 
dation of  the  government. 

Extraordinary  details  are  revealed  in  that  record,  that 
will  have  yet  a  more  full  compilation.  This  summary 
relates  more  to  a  personal  vindication  than  to  the  great 
public  importance  of  the  case ;  which  was  impressively 
set  forth  by  Judge  Parker  in  his  last  lecture  as  Professor 
of  the  Harvard  Law  School.* 

Following  the  record  of  the  court  is  the  opinion  of 
the  reviser  of  the  department.  It  labors  to  sustain  the 
warrant  for  the  case,  but  as  President  Lincoln  said  of  it 
to  Senator  Sumner,  he  is  compelled  to  abandon  all  alle- 
gations for  this  intensely  fought  prosecution,  except  the 
'' sure  thing  071  the  tin'' mvoWing  less  than  ;^ioo.  He 
decided  as  follows  : 


*"  Smith  Brothers  &  Co.,  of  Boston,  were  contractors  for  sup- 
plies for  the  use  of  the  Navy  Department." 

"Their  real  offense  seems  to  have  been  that  they  refused  to 
become  participators  in  frauds  upon  the  government." 

*  *  *  *  *  * 

"  The  trial  was  of  great  length,  but  the  charges  were  all  tri- 
umphantly met  and  refuted." 

•5«-  -X-  *  *  ^  -K- 

"  The  President  committed  the  case  to  a  Senator  for  a  report, 
who  justly  and  properly  exonerated  Messrs.  Smith  from  all  blame, 
and  the  President  disapproved  of  the  proceedings,  perhaps  in 
terms  not  very  complimentary  to  the  court,  or  others  who  were 
active  in  promoting  the  prosecution." — Lectures  on  the  three 
dangers  of  the  Republic^  delivered  in  the  Law  School  of  Harvard 
College  in  i86y  by  foel  Parker, 


94 


First.     The  finding  of  the  court  on  tin  was  "justified." 

Secoyid.  The  finding  of  the  court  on  emery  cloth,  less 
clearly  made  out,  and  less  important. 

Third.  "The  same  observation  is,  in  my  judgment, 
"applicable  to  the  third  specification  under  both  charges. 
"The  delivery  of  inferior  articles  is  very  small  in  compari- 
"son  with  the  whole  quantity  delivered  under  the  contract, 
"and  may  well  have  happened  through  inadvertence." 

Secretary  Welles  had  good  need  to  protect  his  court  not 
only  from  further  "public  reprehension,"  but  ridicule,  in 
view  of  the  record  to  which  the  seven  old  naval  officers 
attached  their  verdict  of 

'  *  *  Proven, '  as  to  24  single  articles  of  hardware  in  a  con- 
tract for  12,564  single  articles  ;  and  '  not  proven'  as  to  the 
others. ' ' 

At  this  point  the  verdict  of  the  Boston  Board  of  Trade 
is  apposite : 

"In  view  of  such  facts,    the  charge   of  'fraud'    or   ol 
' '  fraudulent  intention  is  utterly  frivolous.       The  wonder 
"indeed  is,  that  in  so  large  a  business,  and  in  the  condi- 
"  tion  of  the  market  since  the  beginning  of  the  war,  the 
"number  of  articles  below  the  standard  quality  should  be 
"so  very  limited.      Of  the  general  good  quality  of  the 
"goods  and   wares  sold   and  delivered,  there  can  be  no 
'  *  doubt. ' '  — Report  of  Special  Committee. 
Fourth.    ' '  *  Not  proven  ' — obviously  correct  and  proper. ' ' 
Fifth  and  Sixth.    "Stricken  out  by  the  court." 
Seve7ith.    *  *  The  exclusion  of  testimony  offered  by  the  de- 
fense was  an  error  in  law  and  in  derogation  of  his  right." 

These  were  the  conclusions  by  the  counsel  of  the  con- 
spirators, from  2,500  pages  of  testimony,  gathered  after 
a  year  of  inquisition  and  court-martial ;  at  a  cost  to  the 
government  of  at  least  ;^40,ooo ;  to  the  respondents,  in 
legal  expenses,  printing,  etc.,  of  ;^20,ooo;  and  of  dam- 
ages in  aggregate  that  ;^  100,000  would  not  compensate. 


96 


This  will  be  accepted  as  within  the  fact,  when  it  is 
realized  that  the  defendant's  business,  established  in 
Boston  and  New  York,  after  twenty  years  of  enterprise, 
was  utterly  destroyed  by  the  onslaught;  all  books  and 
papers  being  held  for  the  period  of  nine  months  from 
their  seizure,  and  the  utmost  powers  of  mental  and 
physical  endurance  being  demanded  in  defense  of  all 
that  could  make  life  desirable.  Not  only  were  all  busi- 
ness facilities  collapsed  by  the  blow,  but  the  defendant 
could  only  recover  mental  poise  and  strength  to  re-enter 
upon  the  activities  of  life  by  absolute  retirement  to  the 
quiet  of  rural  pursuits. 

The  sense  of  outrage  at  the  above  revision  of  the 
counsel  of  the  Navy  Department,  sent  by  President 
Lincoln  to  Senator  Sumner  for  his  review,  prompted  his 
emphatic  indignation  : 

"  If  a  mountain  in  labor  ever  brought  forth  a  mouse,  it 
"  is  this  mountainous  prosecution,  whose  only  offspring  yet 
"  crawling  on  earth  is  an  allegation  of  loss  to  the  United 
' '  States  of  one  hundred  dollars  !  But  if  we  look  further  at 
"this  transaction,  it  will  be  seen  that  it  is  absolutely 
' '  unimpeachable. ' ' 


VIII. 
THE    GAIN    TO    GOVERNMENT 

UPON 

CONTRACTS   WITH    SMITH    BROTHERS. 


Extract  from  Report  of  the  Boston  Board  of  Trade. 

"  Bandaged  eyes  and  even  scales  are  the  emblems  of 
justice.  Before  a  civil  tribunal,  State  or  Federal,  our 
Associate  would  have  been  tried  on  a  suit  of  co7itract  by  a 
judge  of  high  legal  attainments,  who  would  have  co7ifined 
the  evidence  to  the  case ;  and  who  would  have  decided  to 
admit  or  reject  testimony  after  arguments  of  counsel,  and  in 
the  presence  of  both  parties  to  the  issue.  And  non-perform- 
ance proved,  the  jury  would  have  returned  a  verdict  of 
damages  in  dollars  and  cents  ;  and  (no  appeal),  here  the 
matter  would  have  terminated.  Justice  is  even-handed 
between  individuals,  and  should  be  so  between  govern- 
ments and  citizens.  For  the  first  time,  and  upon  this  point, 
we  quote  from  Mr.  Smith's  '  Review  of  the  argument  of  the 
Judge  Advocate,'  thus  : 

"  The  loss  of  interests  to  Smith  Brothers  &  Co.  has  not 
been  less  than  two  per  cent,  upon  their  sales,  through  the 
delinquency  of  government  payment  ;  or  $25,000  on 
$1,250,000;  although  the  early  contracts  stipulated  that 
payments  '  will  be  paid  by  the  Navy  Agent  within  thirty 
days  after  bills,  duly  authenticated,  shall  have  been  pre- 
sented to  him.'  " 

Again : 

* '  It  required  energy  and  caution  to  prevent  these  con- 
tracts from  being  disastrous.  Many  were  abandoned  by 
other  parties  on  account  of  losses  involved,  and  relief  bills 
were   passed    by    Congress    for    contractors  ;    but    Smith 

96 


97 


Brothers  <&  Co.  strove  to  fulfil  their  contracts  with  the  gov- 
ernment (as  with  all  men),  up  to  the  time  of  the  violent 
proceedings  against  them — contracts  on  which  the  advance 
realized  to  the  government  ivas  certainly  not  less  than 
$200,000.'' 

' '  The  '  advance '  was  for  the  benefit  of  the  country  ; 
but,  on  the  other  hand,  the  country  should,  as  '  between 
man  and  wife,'  make  good  the  'loss,'  whether  much  or  lit- 
tle ;  because  the  country  is  not  entitled  (in  popular  phrase), 
to  '  both  sides  of  the  bargain.'  The  result,  then,  on  this 
branch  of  our  inquiry  is,  that  on  a  question  of  contract, 
Franklin  W.  Smith,  and  not  the  Government, 
is   the  party  entitled  to  a  verdict  eor  damages. 

Smith  Brothers  contracted  for  3,000  tons  of  pig-iron, 
for  shot  and  shell,  at  an  average  of  about  twenty-five 
dollars  per  ton.  Before  the  delivery  was  completed  the 
value  advanced  to  forty-tw^o  dollars  per  ton  ;  making  a 
gain  to  the  Government  of  more  than  forty  thousand 
dollars  ;  but  fully  this  sum  was  revengefully  wasted 
upon  their  persecution. 

Merchants  will  realize  the  excessive  labor,  perplexity 
and  responsibility  involved  in  outfit  of  ships  of  war, 
upon  peremptory  orders  for  a  multiplicity  of  articles,  at 
brief  notice  of  a  fixed  hour  of  sailing,  in  a  time  of  great 
dearth  of  merchandise. 


IX. 

''THE  DEFENDANTS  HAD  AN  OVATION  IN  THE 
CONGRATULATION  OF  THEIR  FRIENDS  AND 
FELLOW  CITIZENS. "-Hon.  Charles  Sumner. 

In  evidence  of  the  eagemes.s  of  the  citizens  of  Boston 
to  express  their  satisfaction  with  the  action  of  the  Presi- 
dent, the  following  extracts,  in  record  of  the  martyrdom 
of  Mr.  Lincoln,  may  be  allowable  : 


From  the  "  BOSTON  ADVERTISER,"  April  15,  1865. 

"  The  terrible  tidings  which  were  flashed  over  the  wire.s 
yesterday  morning  of  the  assassination  of  President  Lincoln, 
caused  the  deepest  sadness  and  the  most  intense  excitement 
among  our  citizens.  The  great  joy  and  gladness  which 
have  filled  the  hearts  of  all  loyal  people  were  changed  to 
sorrow  and  anguish  by  the  reading  of  this  terrible  news. 

"The  thousands  of  flags  which  have  been  for  the  past 
two  weeks  flying  in  honor  of  our  Nation's  happiness  at  the 
prospect  of  the  near  approach  of  honorable  peace,  were 
yesterday  placed  at  half-mast  and  draped  in  mourning." 


Public  Meeting  in   Tremont  Temple. 

' '  Upon  the  reception  of  the  sad  news  of  the  death  of  our 
beloved  President,  a  meeting  was  called  in  Tremont  Tem- 
ple, which  was  attended  by  an  immense  congregation.   The 

98 


99 


front  of  the  ])latform  was  draped  in  mourning,  and  the 
American  flag,  also  draped,  was  thrown  over  the  pulpit.  A 
fine  portrait  of  President  Lincoln  was  also  placed  in  front  of 
the  pulpit.  Franklin  W.  Smith,  Esq. ,  was  called  to  preside, 
*  *  A  fervent  and  heart-felt  prayer  was  offere  by  Rev. 
S.  F.  Smith,  D.  D.,  the  author  of  the  National  hymn 
'  America.' 


From  the  '^BOSTON  HERALD." 

"Yesterday  forenoon  an  impromptu  meeting  of  mer- 
chants was  held  at  the  Merchants'  Exchange,  and  it  was 
decided  to  have  a  public  demonstration  on  the  common  in 
the  afternoon,  as  a  fitting  close  to  the  solemnities  of  the 
day.  The  meeting  was  called  to  order  by  Geo.  P.  Denny. 
Esq  ;  Charles  G.  Nazro  was  chosen  to  preside. 

"  Remarks  were  ma:de  by  Messrs.  Franklin  W.  Smith, 
Edward  S.  Tobey,  E.  N.  Farnsworth  and  others. 

"  By  three  o'clock  the  people  began  to  assemble  on  the 
Common.  A  procession  marched  through  Tremont,  Boyl- 
ston,  Arlington.  Beacon  and  Park  streets,  to  the  Park 
street  gate,  through  it,  and  thence  along  the  Beacon  street 
Mall,  to  solemn  dirges  by  the  band,  to  the  parade  ground, 
where  two  stands  had  been  erected  for  speakers.  In  addi- 
tion to  the  procession  a  vast  crowd  of  ladies  and  gentlemen 
assembled  and  there  were  probabl}-  from  fifteen  to  tw  enty 
thousand  persons  present." 

5|J  'fC  ifC  ^  }fi 

"  On  stand  No.  i,  the  Navy  Yard  Band  commenced  the 
exercises  by  performing  a  dirge.  E.  S.  Tobey,  who  pre- 
sided, introduced  the  Rev.  RoUin  H.  Neale,  D.  D.,  who 
offered  prayer.  Appropriate  speeches  were  made  by  the 
Chairman,  Hon.  Josiah  Quincy,  Hon.  Judge  Russell,  Hon. 
Samuel  H.  Walley,  Rev.  William  Hague,  D.D,  and  Rev. 
E.  N.  Kirk,  D.D. 


100 


"At  stand  No.  2,  Charles  G.  Nazro,  Esq.,  presided. 
Gilmore's  Band  played  '  Rest,  Spirit,  Rest,'  Rev.  M.  Mal- 
lalieu  offered  prayer.  The  speakers  were  the  Chairman, 
Hon.  Alexander  H.  Rice,  Rev.  E.  B.  Webb,  D.D., 
PVanklin  W.  Smith,  Esq.,  and  Hon.  Charles  A.  Phelps." 

Thus  the  tragedy  which  closed  upon  the  life  of  Abra- 
ham Lincoln,  immediately  upon  his  deliverance  of  the 
defendant  in  the  above  history,  was  mournfully  asso- 
ciated with  congratulations  and  cordial  greetings  from 
the  people  of  his  native  city. 


UNIVERSITY  OF  CALIFORNIA  LIBRARY 
This  book  is  DUE  on  the  last  date  stamped  below. 

Fine  schedule:  25  cents  on  first  day  overdue 

50  cents  on  fourth  day  overdue 
One  dollar  on  seventh  day  overdue. 


'     IC".  '"7 


RfcC'D  i,.D 

JUN 1 6  1961 


LD  21-100m-12,'46(A2012sl6)4120 


GAYLAMOUNT 

PAMPHLET  BINDER 


Manufactured  by 

eAYLORD  BROS.  Inc. 

Syracuse,  N.  Y. 

Stockton,  Calif. 


U.C.  BERKELEY  LIBRARIES 


CD23SSDb31 


N^55GG6 


THE  UNIVERSITY  OF  CALIFORNIA  UBRARY 


FV 


I 


